A quarter million tons to Mars: SpaceX’s ambitious vision – Ynetnews

Elon Musk, the founder and CEO of SpaceX, outlined his vision years ago to transport humanity to Mars using the Starship spacecraft. Last weekend, a year after Starship's first trial and a few weeks after the third trial, Musk unveiled an updated plan, which includes the establishment of an independent colony on Mars within two decades.

Musk addressed SpaceX employees at the company's Boca Chica space base in South Texas. He reiterated the imperative of transforming humanity into a multi-planetary species, transcending the constraints of a single planet, and, in the distant future, into an interstellar species, not confined to a single solar system.

4 View gallery

Starship spacecraft

(Photo: SpaceX)

Mars stands as the primary candidate for human settlement, currently representing the sole viable option. To realize this monumental goal, SpaceX developed the Starship system, a massive spacecraft capable of vertical landing and reusability that can be launched repeatedly. Its launch vehicle, Super Heavy, is also designed for multiple deployments. The entire assembly of the spacecraft and the launch vehicle is collectively referred to as Starship, though this can be somewhat confusing.

In Starship's third trial, conducted in March 2024, the spacecraft achieved its designated space trajectory for the first time, followed by re-entry into the Earth's atmosphere over the Indian Ocean. However, the intended activation of its engines in space and subsequent targeted crash into the sea encountered technical failures. The spacecraft failed to reactivate its engines for a controlled descent and ultimately disintegrated during re-entry. Additionally, the launch vehicle, which was supposed to perform a landing maneuver over water and then crash into the sea, exploded before completing its mission.

In his Saturday speech, Musk expressed hope that the spacecraft would successfully withstand the heat during re-entry in its fourth experimental flight, scheduled for a few weeks later. In the future, plans to implement a novel landing technique for the launch vehicle, and in some cases the spacecraft itself, involving a specialized tower equipped with mechanical arms to gently guide the hovering rocket to the ground. In the forthcoming flight, Musk said, the rocket will attempt a landing with a virtual tower over the sea, executing the vertical stabilization maneuver while hovering, before crashing into the water. A successful virtual maneuver would pave the way for its real-world counterpart to be tested in the subsequent fifth flight.

4 View gallery

A formidable launch system poised to surpass all predecessors. Starship 3, on the right, compared to the two preceding models

(Photo: SpaceX)

A successful virtual maneuver would pave the way for its real-world counterpart to be tested in the subsequent fifth flight. The maneuver is more challenging concerning the spacecraft, due to its high-speed descent from space. Musk stated that the company would want to record at least two consecutive successes in such a maneuver over the sea before attempting to land the spacecraft at its Texas launch base, to reduce the potential risk of debris and shrapnel scattering over the United States and Mexico in the event of a malfunction.

Presently, Starship launches are performed exclusively only from SpaceX's facility in Texas, but the company has already started building a suitable launch pad at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, where it launches most of its rockets. Musk has revealed that the company is constructing two launch pads there, with the first anticipated to become operational by the middle of next year. Along with an additional launch pad under construction at Boca Chica, this will bring the total to four active Starship launch facilities by the end of next year. Trials will continue in Texas, while routine operational launches will shift to Florida.

The main innovation in Musk's remarks was the presentation of the future model of Starship, called Starship 3. Following the completion of trials, SpaceX plans to initiate flights using Starship 2, which is slightly larger than the models currently being tested: it will be about 52 meters tall, compared to about 50 meters in the current version, and will be capable of transporting a payload of at least 100 tons to Earths orbit. The upcoming Starship 3 will be nearly 70 meters in height, equipped with nine engines instead of six, and capable of carrying over 200 tons of payload to Earths orbit. For comparison, the Saturn V rocket, which launched the Apollo spacecraft to the moon, carried a payload of about 140 tons to Earths orbit.

In parallel with upgrades to the spacecraft, the company is also developing a new model of Raptor engines, utilized both in the launch vehicle and in Starship itself. Musk presented the ex-generation engine, Raptor 3, which is anticipated to withstand harsh conditions, particularly heat, owing to an internalized design for components that are currently installed externally. Additionally, Raptor 3 will provide stronger thrust and will be easier to manufacture due to the improved design.

The key to Starship missions to Mars, or any other destination, will be refueling in Earth orbita technology that has not yet been tested, in part due to the challenges of transferring large quantities of liquids in microgravity conditions. SpaceX has already commenced the third experimental flight of Starship to evaluate technologies for fuel transfer between tanks. The long-term plan envisions Starship vessels loaded with cargo to Mars or other destinations reaching Earth orbit with nearly depleted fuel tanks, having consumed most of their fuel to bring the payload into orbit. There, they will connect to refueling ships that will replenish their tanks, before setting off to their distant destination.

Given the differing orbital speeds of Earth and Mars around the sun, launches to the Red Planet are possible only during specific windows when the two planets are relatively close, resulting in a journey lasting typically 6 to 9 months. These potential launch windows to Mars occur every 26 months. According to Musks vision, it should be possible to launch up to ten Starship spacecraft per day during these time windows. Once fueled, these spacecraft will await the opportune moment to initiate their journey toward Mars.

Musk proposes that each craft, carrying 200 tons of cargo, could collectively transport 250,000 tons of equipment to Mars during each launch window, culminating in delivery of one million tons of essential supplies to the neighboring planet over an approximate span of about eight years. Musk believes that establishing a functioning and self-sustainable colony on Mars, capable of producing and meeting all its needs independently without reliance on Earth, requires the migration of a million people and several million tons of cargo. He believes this goal can be achieved within twenty years. This ambitious endeavor entails the construction of thousands of spacecraft per year, a feat that Musk deems entirely feasible and comparable to current automotive industry scales.

4 View gallery

According to Musk, a self-sustaining Mars colony that would be independent of Earth could be established within 20 years. Visualization of SpaceXs Mars Colony

(Photo: SpaceX)

Such a colony would need to develop, among other things, energy sources and methods for their production, mining methods for ice and minerals, long-term life support systems, construction methods and technologies utilizing local materials, and a global communication system. According to Musk's vision, the need for new technologies opens up many opportunities for entrepreneurs and offers new horizons for companies entering these markets.

According to his plan, most of the Starship spacecraft launched to Mars will not return from there but will instead undergo recycling for colony needs. The spacecraft, constructed from stainless steel, could be melted down and recycled to produce tools, building materials, and more. Later, some of the spacecraft will be launched back to Earth after refueling, utilizing resources harvested from the Martian atmosphere and from the ice in its soil, notably methane (CH4) and oxygen (O2). Ultimately, this could establish regular, albeit slow, two-way traffic between Earth and Mars.

Central to realizing the grand plan is a significant reduction in launch expenses. Musk is convinced that by implementing mass production techniques for thousands of spacecraft and rockets per year, using affordable and readily available fuel, and fully recycling these crafts and rockets, the cost of launching a Starship could drop to just $2-3 million. While this might still seem costly, it is notably less than the price of launching "Falcon 1", which the company launched at the beginning of its journey in 2006, capable of carrying less than 200 kilograms of payload into Earth orbit.

In the meantime, the company is financing most of Starships production and development from its two main projects: the Starlink satellite communication network, which includes more than 6,000 satellites serving close to three million customers, and launches to Earth orbit utilizing the Falcon 9 rocket, SpaceX's trusted workhorse. These rockets deploy satellites for many commercial and governmental clients, as well as crewed and uncrewed Dragon spacecraft to the International Space Station. Currently, until Boeing finally launches its crewed spacecraft, SpaceX remains the sole American entity launching astronauts into space, serving both NASA and private companies such as Axiom.

SpaceX is engaged in many other projects, notably NASA's effort to return humans on the moon again as part of the Artemis program. Starship has been selected by NASA as the designated crewed landing vehicle for the program's initial missions, and potentially also in subsequent endeavors.For these purposes, SpaceX is developing a lunar version of Starship, equipped with appropriate landing legs and devoid of the heat shield and steering fins needed for atmospheric reentry. NASA officially plans a crewed landing on the moon by the end of 2026, though it is more realistically expected to occur two or three years later.

4 View gallery

A testing ground for technologies en route to Mars. SpaceX's envisioned lunar base

(Photo: SpaceX)

The company's agreement with NASA does not grant the space agency exclusive rights to use the lunar landing vehicle, allowing SpaceX to sell it to other space agencies or use it for private missions. Indeed, SpaceX has expressed intentions to establish a Moon base, as briefly mentioned by Musk in his recent address. Such a base, if realized, would likely serve SpaceX or its clients as a testing ground for technologies destined for Mars exploration

Meanwhile, SpaceX is solidifying its status as the foremost operator in Earths orbit. According to Musk, about 90 percent of orbital activity is attributable to SpaceX, primarily driven by the Starlink satellites. Musk notes that approximately 90 percent of orbital activity is attributable to SpaceX, primarily due to the Starlink satellites. China accounts for an additional six percent, with the remaining four percent distributed among other global entities.

SpaceX's dominance is expected to increase once Starship becomes fully operational. Well before routine Mars flights become a reality, it's likely that these sizable spacecraft, if they deliver on their promise of low launch costs, will be used not only for deploying large payloads such as space stations but also for satellite deployment and other spacecraft missions. Musk estimates that his company could eventually control 99 percent of activity in Earth orbit. While this goal may sound ambitious and aspirational, judging by SpaceX's progress so far, it is by no means unattainable.

Read more from the original source:

A quarter million tons to Mars: SpaceX's ambitious vision - Ynetnews

Will future colonists on the moon and Mars develop new accents? – Livescience.com

In the not-too-distant future, humans will begin to spread out into the solar system and not just for fleeting visits. The ultimate goal of space exploration (apart from finding aliens) is to set up human colonies on other worlds to learn more about our cosmic neighborhood and search for new resources that could help us thrive on Earth.

The first human space colonies will likely take root on the moon and could emerge within the next few decades. But the bigger, long-term target is to put a colony on Mars, which will become a more realistic goal once we've established a permanent presence on the moon.

The idea of human groups living away from our planet opens up a litany of questions about future colonists for experts to solve, such as how they will grow food or access water and how will they adapt to living with less gravity.

However, one query has long been overlooked: What might future space colonists sound like? Or, more specifically, what kind of accents might they develop?

Human accents are a fascinating topic of research in themselves. Every person has at least some sort of accent, regardless of whether they realize it, and all of these accents can be traced to specific times, places, languages or groups of people here on Earth. But with the dawn of space colonies on the horizon, the way future interplanetary settlers will pronounce their words is uncharted territory.

Related: Which animals will be the first to live on the moon and Mars?

"New accents emerge by imitation," Jonathan Harrington, director of the Institute for Phonetics and Speech Processing at the Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich in Germany, told Live Science. "We remember the sounds and words of a conversation, and these can have a small influence on the future way that we speak."

These changes are subconscious and occur only when we interact with people who have different accents from us over long periods, Harrington said. This is why people who have lived in a new country or region for long periods develop subtle changes to their accents without realizing it.

But when people with different accents become isolated from the rest of the world, the entire group will start to mimic one another, creating a brand-new blend of the available accents, Harrington said. This can start to happen very quickly, especially in small groups, he added.

In 2019, Harrington led a study that analyzed the phonetic changes of 11 researchers who spent a winter isolated in a laboratory in Antarctica. The group comprised eight people from England (five with Southern accents and three with Northern accents), one from the U.S. Northwest, one from Germany and one from Iceland. Throughout the experiment, the researchers noticed that each individual displayed phonetic changes and that the group collectively started pronouncing specific sounds differently and used different parts of their mouths to make those sounds. These were the first steps of a new accent forming.

"Exactly the same thing should happen in any environment in which individuals are isolated together over a prolonged period, whether this is in Antarctica or in space," Harrington said. "In fact, accent change should be even greater in space because contact with the home community is even more difficult."

On Mars or the moon, colonists could start to develop subconscious-yet-audible changes to their accents within a few months especially on Mars, where conversing with people on Earth is even more challenging due to the roughly 20-minute delay it takes for messages to travel between the two planets, Harrington said.

However, for unique, long-lasting accents to emerge, the colony likely would need to be big enough for colonists to reproduce, so that the accent could be passed on to future generations.

Related: Which planet is closest to Earth? (Hint: There's more than 1 right answer.)

If new colony members were added to a colony in the early stages of habitation, they could shift the trajectory of that group's accent. However, once an accent were fully established, new colonists would likely have a minor impact on how that accent evolved and would slowly change their accents to match that of the rest of the colony.

Any new accents that developed in space colonies would likely be shaped by the most abundant accent within the group, Harrington said. A good example of this is the Australian accent, which has lots of similarities to London's "Cockney" accent because most of the original settlers had that accent, he added.

If the initial accents were evenly split, then the new accents would be a mix of them all, rather than resembling one particular accent. As a result, unless future colonies on Mars and the moon are made up of groups with an identical mix of accents, they would likely develop different accents, Harrington said. The different environmental factors on the moon and Mars would likely not impact either accent in a major way, he added.

Without knowing the accents of the astronauts that will make up future Martian and lunar colonies, it is hard to predict what these accents might sound like. However, as soon as the colonists are selected, it could be possible to predict how the accents will evolve.

During the 2019 study in Antarctica, the study team used a computer learning program to predict how the participants' accents might change during the study. To their surprise, the team found the vocal changes they observed matched up very well with what the program predicted.

Here is the original post:

Will future colonists on the moon and Mars develop new accents? - Livescience.com

Can Elon Musk Get Us to Mars Without Killing Everyone – Medium

Photo by SpaceX on Unsplash

One mans vision looms large Elon Musk, the enigmatic entrepreneur behind SpaceX, has long set his sights on the Red Planet. But amidst the lofty ambitions and grand promises, one question looms large: Can Elon Musk really get humans to Mars alive?

Lets break down the complexities of this monumental endeavor. The longest duration a human has spent in space stands at 437 days, achieved by Russian cosmonaut Valeri Polyakov. With the transit time from Earth to Mars ranging between 150 to 300 days, the logistics of reaching Mars are within reach, at least in terms of duration. However, the true challenge lies in the journey back. The round trip encompasses a staggering 600 days, a duration for which we lack empirical data on the human bodys ability to endure.

But what about the broader goal of establishing a sustainable colony on Mars? The answer, unequivocally, is yes but with a caveat. While humanity may one day call Mars home, achieving a self-sustaining colony is a monumental task that will take decades to realize. The sheer magnitude of resources required from lifting massive payloads into orbit to transporting delicate equipment across vast distances presents formidable challenges that cannot be underestimated.

So, can Elon Musk deliver on his promise to transport humans to Mars alive? The answer is a cautious yes. Musks SpaceX endeavors have undeniably propelled space exploration to new heights, but the ultimate goal may be more aligned with deep-space tourism than colonization. While Musks ambitions are commendable, the reality of establishing a thriving Martian colony will require a collaborative effort between nation-states, mega-corporations, and the international community at large.

Read more:

Can Elon Musk Get Us to Mars Without Killing Everyone - Medium

Red Earth – Film Threat

Director Georg Koszulinskis experimental film Red Earth takes viewers several hundred years into the future. In the year 2492, Mars has been colonized, and the first results of terraforming are beginning to emerge. While Earth had been hell-bent on self-destruction for centuries, a war between Earth and Mars finished the job, rendering our home planet into a blasted, inhospitable wasteland. The conflict began when it became clear that Martian planetary ethics were evolving to be more mindful of the environment. In contrast, Earths conviction was that Martian settlers were there for no reason other than exploiting Martian resources and supporting the home planet.

The story spans three generations with interwoven first-person narratives of a single-family participating in the Martian Colonization Project. The eldest is activist Earth scientist Telos (Mark Evans), who gets his daughter Kasei (Christina Leidel) onto a colony ship. She settles on Mars and becomes a revolutionary in the rebellion against Earth. In turn, her son Thomas (Matt Devine) is one of the first Martians to return and take stock of the war damage on Earth. Theres another character off-screen, Ursa Harriot, a historian and scribe who is quoted in text cards from a fictional history of the rebellion called Tractatus Mars.

The thing about experimental film is that, by definition, the style is going to defy normal expectations of film structure. Its important to go in knowing that and not be too put off by choices like a lack of script/dialogue, a non-linear narrative, an unusual visual presentation, or a soundtrack designed to evoke anxiety. The cinematography is primarily darkened, reddish landscapes, shots of the faces of the actors, and futuristic sequences of images distorted by digital noise. Red Earth employs all of these variations on normal cinema themes.

rendering our home planet into a blasted, inhospitable wasteland

For this film, also, a viewer needs to be comfortable with anti-capitalist, aggressively pro-environmental views. These positions play well in this context, taking our current apathy toward global warming and global wealth gap disparities to their logical conclusions over time. Given that we may well achieve the ability to travel to Mars in the next century or so, its not much of a reach to suggest that Mars colonists might not want to become the new world coal miners for a corrupt, fading Earth hegemony. The website supporting Red Earth mentions that it takes place in the late Anthropocene era. Thats another kind of final warning to us here on the (for now) blue planet Anthropocene is a way to describe the time during which humans have had sufficient technology to inflict a substantial impact on the planet. Its also a way to suggest our time will one day pass as the defining characteristic of a geological age is that it ends at some point.

Red Earth is a jarring film experience, flouting narrative and structure rules, as well as breaking the show, dont tell rule by having most of the salient information conveyed in narrated voice-overs and in the Tractatus Mars text excerpts displayed on the screen. Theres little to no action, no interaction, and a lot of speechifying. In the context of the film as a language, this one needs more verbs.

That said, its worth taking a spin on Red Earth if you think of it as a meditation on the life of our planet. Its a parable about what could happen to us if we dont turn aside from the industrial greed thats rapidly moving our ecosystem toward being uninhabitable. The irony in the backlash coming from Mars is that the way well get there is going to be based on that same capitalist push for more for the rich and less for everyone else. What if your workers do, finally, seize the means of production and then turn your home planet into a hostile desert to stop you from ruining theirs?

For more screening information, visit the Red Earth official website.

Read the rest here:

Red Earth - Film Threat

Did the Curiosity rover find alien bones on Mars? – Syfy

In the classic run of The Twilight Zone(check the SYFY schedule for airdates), Rod Serling delivered one of the most blistering twists in storytelling history with the episode I Shot an Arrow into the Air. The 15th episode of the first season begins with a crewed mission to an unexplored asteroid. Disaster strikes and half of the eight-person crew is killed when their craft crashes on the asteroids surface. Slowly, the rest of the crew perish, trying to survive on an alien world, until only one remains.

The 1968 filmPlanet of the Apes (also written by Serling) has a similar premise. Astronauts on an interstellar voyage waken from stasis and crash land on an alien planet in a star system 300 light years from Earth. There, they encounter populations of intelligent non-human apes and a subclass of primitive humans.

The characters of Battlestar Galactica (streaming now on Peacock!) represent the remnant of humanity leftover after all out war with a cybernetic race of warmongers known as the Cylons. The remaining humans inhabit 12 colony worlds, but theyre searching for a lost colony and their true home: Earth.

RELATED:Where is the Battlestar Galactica cast now? Edward James Olmos, Katee Sackhoff & more

In each case, the protagonists of these stories (not to mention the audience) were in for a big surprise. The last surviving astronaut of that asteroid mission, lived just long enough to learn his spacecraft had malfunctioned and he had crashed right here at home, in the Nevada desert. Having escaped the clutches of the apes, Charlton Heston's Taylor rides the shoreline on a horse and discovers the partially buried remains of the Statue of Liberty. And the humans looking for Earth, they eventually gave up, settled someplace else, and named it Earth in honor of the world they never found. That false Earth is the world youre living on right now.

Each of those stories have one thing in common: by the time the credits roll, weve learned that what the characters took for an alien world was, in fact, Earth all along.

Its a classic trope, and one which has been employed exhaustively, but its never been tried in real life. Imagine our surprise, then, when the Curiosity rover recently stumbled upon what appear to be the remains of a decayed rib cage sticking out of a Martian rock.

Curiosity has been roaming around Gale Crater, a 96-mile impact crater, for more than a decade, taking pictures the whole time. Martian spacecraft track the date based on how many Martian days (Sols) have passed since they landed. Sol 1 is the day they land, Sol 30 is one Martian month later, and so on. On Sol 3798 (That was April 1 on the Earth calendar, but this is no April Fools prank), the rover snapped pictures of a rock with a series of long, slender spikes sticking out of its side.

At first glance, it conjures visions of ribbed newts, a species of salamander with a defense mechanism that would make aliens proud. When threatened, ribbed newts change the angle of their ribs, swinging them forward while keeping the rest of the body rigid. As a result, the ribs pierce the newts skin, protruding from the sides of the body like adamantium claws in need of directions. On their way through the skin, theyre covered in a venomous mucus, turning them into deadly weapons. It isnt the most comfortable defense mechanism but, boy, is it effective.

While Gale Crater is whats left of a massive lake which existed roughly 3.5 billion years ago, it's unlikely that lake was filled with rib-stabbing newts. The images spurred conversation on Twitter, from scientists and enthusiasts alike. Nathalie Cabrol, an astrobiologist studying Mars ancient lake beds said she has never seen anything stranger in over 20 years studying Martian geology. She went on to explain that the formation, strange as it is, is likely the result of ripples in the rock and a whole lot of erosion. But if theres one thing weve learned about Mars, its that things arent always what they seem.

This certainly isnt the first time humans have found an unusual rock formation on Mars and thought it might be something weird. The red planet is famous for having a gigantic face on its surface and it has only been a few months since astronomers found what looks like the face of a bear in severe need of therapy, staring up from the surface of Mars. Each one is a surprise, but that they exist at all, shouldnt be surprising.

RELATED: Astronomers find the face of a cracked-out bear on the surface of Mars

If you take one desert planet, muss its hair with liquid water and volcanic activity, then turn down the lights, lock the doors, and leave it to the whims of wind-blown sand for a few billion years, youll end up with just about every geological formation you can imagine, and a few you cant. This isnt even the first time weve found something bone-like on Mars. Back in 2014, Curiositys MastCam imaged what looked like a loose collection of scattered bones, partially buried in Martian soil. One rock in particular sticks out among the rest, thanks to its striking resemblance to a femur.

If found on Earth, these rocks might trick a paleontologist for a minute, but theyd figure it out pretty quickly. On Mars, though, its pretty clear that geology is at work. Is it possible that life arose on Mars in the past? Yes! And were working hard to find out. Is it possible that Martian life not only existed but was complex enough to adapt large bodies and leave fossilized bones behind? Hell, we dont know. No one does. But probably not. If they did, there should be a lot of them and todays kids will grow up to become alien paleontologists, the coolest job that has ever existed. Its more likely that theyll grow up to become alien geologists and finally explain how weird rock formations like these are created.

You know how the old saying goes: never attribute to dope alien creatures that which is adequately explained by physics.

Watch Battlestar Galactica streaming on Peacock, and learn that the real Earth was the friends we made along the way.

Read the original:

Did the Curiosity rover find alien bones on Mars? - Syfy

Fired on Mars cast: Who stars in the animated comedy series – Hidden Remote

POLAND - 2022/01/21: In this photo illustration, HBO MAX logo is displayed on a smartphone with stock market graphics in the background. (Photo Illustration by Omar Marques/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

A new workplace comedy has entered into the streaming game! The upcoming Max animated comedy dystopian series Fired on Mars premieres Apr. 21 on the streaming service formerly known as HBO Max. The service has been switching their focus from family-based programming to adult animation withFired on Marsarriving on the platform at perfect time.

The series explores the precarious relationship between work and selflight years away from Earth. Jeff Cooper, the lead character, finds himself adrift in an office colony and is forced to reinvent himself and find meaning in a dangerous, alien, yet all-too-familiar corporate landscape.The animated series is based on the 2016 short film of the same name from newcomer writer/directors Nate Sherman and Nick Vokey. This movie will join the same slate of adult animated series that will live on the platform including the upcoming Clone High reboot.Are you looking to find out whos voicing the characters on the show? Read on to find out!

Previously, it was reported that SNL alum Pete Davidson would lead the series but has since not been mentioned in any current promotional media as the lead. The remaining cast of Fired on Mars has not yet been revealed.Want to see what to expect before the episodes are released? Look on to find out!

Watch the trailer below on the official Max YouTube channel:

Let us know in the comments below if you plan on watching! You can stream all eight episodes of Fired on Mars starting Apr. 20 on Max. Make sure to keep up todate with Hidden Remote for more Fired on Mars news and coverage.

Read the original:

Fired on Mars cast: Who stars in the animated comedy series - Hidden Remote

SpaceX releases simulation video of trip to Mars – Travel Tomorrow

SpaceX has released a simulation video of Mission to Mars, showcasing Elon Musks vision of what the future of space travel could look like, including a colony on the Red Planet.

The 5-minute animation starts off showing Starbase, SpaceXs base on the Gulf Coast of Texas, before the Starship rocket takes off. Built from shiny stainless-steel, with its nostril embellished with fins and ten metres taller than the giant Saturn V rocket, Starship seems to be poised to revolutionise space travel. Capable of transporting thousands of tonnes in weight and greatly reduce back and forth travelling between space and Earth, the fully reusable rocket holds the key of Musks settlement of a colony on Mars.

Soon after take-off, the rocket breaks in two, the 33-engine first stage returns to base and smoothly lands back at the orbital launch tower, while the 50-metre-tall upper stage docks onto a tanker in Earth orbit to fuel up for the long journey ahead.

The video pans over Mars orbit then switches to a from-land view that shows there are total of four ships approaching the planet, leaving bright tails behind them. After a perfect landing, the doors of the rocket open and four astronauts gaze at the domed habitat in the middle of the human settlement seemingly flourishing on the Red Planet.

In February 2022, Musk detailed his vision of the future of space travel and of humans becoming an inter-planetary species. His ambitious goal envisions the creation of a colony on Mars, an insurance coverage, he said, where humanity would be protected from existential dangers on Earth. Starship is capable of doing that, Musk said. Its capable of getting a million tonnes to the surface of Mars and creating a self-sustaining city and I think we should try to do that as soon as we can.

The critical threshold for Mars is to have a city that is self-sustaining, he continued, recognising the difficulty of the ambition and even acknowledging that if any ingredient is missing, however minor it may be, the city would die out. If Earth stops sending shuttles to Mars, Musk envisioned, a colony on the Red Planet could be in jeopardy.

A few months later, SpaceXs chief operating officer Gwynne Shotwell announced that people will reach Mars by the end of the decade, within 5 or 6 years to be more precise. While the company has ambitious plans, two start-ups have partnered to beat Musk to Mars, pledging a trip in 2024.

Read the rest here:

SpaceX releases simulation video of trip to Mars - Travel Tomorrow

Thanks to NASAs Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, you can now circumnavigate the Martian surface – Syfy

In SYFYs The Ark (airing Wednesday nightson SYFY, and streaming next day on Peacock!), the surviving crew of the colony ship Ark One are on a one way trip to Proxima Centauri b, humanitys new home, but only if they can get there alive. While the circumstances of their departure from Earth werent ideal, there is something appealing about the opportunity to see another world up close. One way to do that is to hop a ship off planet and endure the grueling trip to another world. Another option is to stay on the couch, crunching popcorn, while you globetrot around Mars in your jammies.

Jay Dickson, an image processing scientist at the Bruce Murray Laboratory for Planetary Visualization at Caltech, led the project to build a global mosaic of Mars, using data from NASAs Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO). The project was funded as part of NASAs Planetary Data Archiving, Restoration and Tools (PDART) program, whose aim is to develop new tools and resources from existing NASA data.

RELATED:'The Ark' writer Rebecca Rosenberg on perspective as only woman in SYFY series' 4-person writers' room

I wanted something that would be accessible to everyone. Schoolchildren can use this now. My mother, who just turned 78, can use this now. The goal is to lower the barriers for people who are interested in exploring Mars, said Dicksonin a statement.

The mosaic was created by stitching together more than 110,000 images taken by the MROs black and white Context Camera. In fact, the MRO has three cameras onboard, each of which is useful for different types of work. The Mars Color Imager (MARCI) produces a low-resolution global map of Mars every day. It doesnt have the sorts of surface features that are fun to look at, but its useful at tracking weather patterns across wide areas and over extended periods. The High-Resolution Imaging Science Experiment (HiRISE) provides full color, high-detail images of small areas, on the same scale as a kitchen table. If they represent two extremes of the imaging spectrum, the CTX sits somewhere in the middle. It doesnt provide color, but it does gather data at the right scale for this kind of global surface map creation.

Images from the CTX have a resolution of roughly 270 square feet (25 square meters) per pixel, making this mosaic the highest resolution global image of Mars ever created. If you tried to print the whole mosaic to make your own scale model of the red planet, youd need an area about the size of the Rose Bowl Stadium in Pasadena, according to JPL. Thats about 900 feet in diameter, in case youre not a fan of collegiate level athletic architecture. Suffice it to say, you could spend a while walking around the virtual red planet.

Building the mosaic was no easy feat and took tens of thousands of hours over the course of six years to complete. The MRO has been in orbit around Mars since 2006 and has been absolutely crushing its job as space paparazzi ever since. In the course of its orbit, it has seen the planet from almost every conceivable angle, and there arent any instructions for stitching thousands of images into the ultimate planetary panorama. Building a mosaic like this is like putting a puzzle together, except most of the pieces have duplicates, some pieces are the wrong shade, and others are missing entirely.

RELATED: See Mars Jezero Crater for yourself in this stunning video tour

To make the job manageable, Dickson created an algorithm to sift through images, identify features, and use those features to stitch images together. When it was done sifting through the MRO data, Dickson had the foundation of his mosaic, but there were still 13,000 images the algorithm couldnt parse. He stitched those together himself manually, one at a time. By the time the project was finished, every single image had been put in its proper place. Any remaining gaps represent areas which hadnt yet been imaged at the time of the project or images which were obscured by clouds or dust.

Already, more than 120 peer reviewed scientific papers have reverenced the mosaic, demonstrating the value of these sorts of tools for research, but you dont need an advanced degree to use it. The MRO mosaic is designed to be as user friendly to as many people as possible. Users are presented with a list of popular destinations, including Jezero Crater, hometown of the Perseverance Rover, with the click of a button. Once you land at your destination, you can click around, zoom in and out, then jump to the next port. You could even circumnavigate Mars manually, like some sort of virtual interplanetary Magellan. Embark here for Gale Crater, Olympus Mons, and all stops between! What are you waiting for? The water is frozen and mostly trapped underground. But still!

If Mars is too near a destination, you can catch the last ship to Proxima Centauri b on The Ark!The Season 1 finale airson SYFYthis Wednesday, April 19, at 10 p.m. ET. Catch up on the story thus far with Episodes 1-11 streamingon Peacock. The series wasofficially renewed for a second seasonearlier this week.

Read more:

Thanks to NASAs Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, you can now circumnavigate the Martian surface - Syfy

William Shatner is back in the captain’s chair in wild new ‘Stars on … – Space.com

The indefatigable William Shatner is about to embark on a Red Planet mission, or at least a simulated one.

Fox is heating up summertime television by approving a full season of the sci-fi reality series, "Stars on Mars," a celebrity-fueled unscripted show spotlighting "Star Trek" luminaryWilliam Shatner in a host-style role, according to Variety (opens in new tab). This extra-planetary series will premiere in June and is centered around Earthly entertainment stars as they slip on spacesuits to reside inside a colony habitat designed to simulate environments that a Mars astronaut might encounter on a future mission.

"Stars on Mars" will launch on Monday, June 5, at 8 p.m. exclusively on Fox. This intriguing show arrives from the creative folks at Fremantle's Eureka Productions and follows this crew of celebrity contestants competing in the Mars-ish setting with Shatner handing out certain tasks and commands to the stars from a simulated Mission Control until only one "celebronaut" remains standing.

Related: Watch SpaceX launch a Starship to Mars in this gorgeous new animation

"The moment I heard the pitch for 'Stars on Mars,' I knew a show this bold, this big and this outlandish simply belonged on Fox," said Fox unscripted programming president Allison Wallach in a press statement, Variety reported. "Watching celebrities take giant leaps out of their comfort zone and step into the unexpected will no doubt be truly transformational and comical. Throughout, we will learn a lot about these stars, and when you factor in William Shatner leading the charge from Mission Control, we have the makings of a show that's ready for blast off."

Here's the official description of this far-out Martian free-for-all:

The show will open with the celebrities living together as they live, eat, sleep, strategize, and bond with each other in the same space station. During their stay, they will be faced with authentic conditions that simulate life on Mars, and they must use their brains and brawn or maybe just their stellar social skills to outlast the competition and claim the title of brightest star in the galaxy. The celebrities will compete in missions and will vote to eliminate one of their crewmates each week, sending them back to Earth.

Cue the intergalactic alliances and rivalries. "Stars on Mars" will send these famous rookie space travelers where no one has gone before and reveal who has what it takes to survive life on Mars.

Eureka Productions' Chris Culvenor conceived this clever "Stars on Mars" concept and will act as executive producer alongside Paul Franklin, Wes Dening and Eden Gaha. Charles Wachter is aboard the project as executive producer and showrunner.

"Stars on Mars" will premiere on Fox on June 5, 2023.

Follow us @Spacedotcom (opens in new tab), or on Facebook (opens in new tab) and Instagram (opens in new tab).

Read the original:

William Shatner is back in the captain's chair in wild new 'Stars on ... - Space.com

Ved Chirayath is on mission to map world’s oceans – Mirage News

The University of Miami professor, National Geographic Explorer, inventor, and fashion photographer has created and developed next-generation remote sensing instruments capable of mapping the seafloor in remarkable detail.

One misstep and Ved Chirayath would have been a goner. Cut off from civilization and his cell phone useless, he knew that medical aid would never reach him in time if he were bitten by one of the countless sea snakes that surrounded him.

Theyre curious creatures, the University of Miami researcher and National Geographic Explorer said of the highly venomous snakes. Theyll swim right up to you and lick you. And when they sleep, they sleep head down in the rocks. So, my real concern was not to step on one.

But despite the very real prospect of death, Chirayath concentrated on the task at hand: mapping a colony of stromatolites in Australias snake-infested Shark Bay.

He would spend the entire two months of that 2012 field campaign navigating around the deadly snakes, the thought of dying only occasionally entering his mind. His unquenchable thirst for knowledge allowed him to stay focused.

Its that same thirst that drives him today in his quest to explore Earths last unexplored frontier: its oceans.

We have mapped more of Mars and our Moon than we have of our planets seafloor, and we know more about the large-scale structure of our universe and its history than we do about the various systems in our oceans, said Chirayath, the G. Unger Vetlesen Professor of Earth Sciences at the Rosenstiel School of Marine, Atmospheric, and Earth Science. And we know so much more about our universe because we can see very far into space and in different wavelengths.

Peering into the deep ocean, however, is another matter. Light penetrates only so far below the sea surface, and ocean waves greatly distort the appearance of undersea objects.

But using a camera he invented that literally sees through ocean waves, Chirayath is removing those distortions and helping to reveal the trove of deep secrets hidden by our oceans. Mounted on a drone flying above the water, FluidCam uses a technology called Fluid Lensing to photograph and map the ocean in remarkable clarity. From American Samoa and Guam to Hawaii and Puerto Rico, he has used the device to map more than a dozen shallow marine ecosystems such as coral reefs at depths as low as 63 feet.

That still pales in comparison to the average depth of the ocean, which is nearly 4,000 meters. And 99 percent of the habitable volume of our planet is in that region, said Chirayath, who also directs the Rosenstiel Schools Aircraft Center for Earth Studies (ACES).

So, he created the more powerful MiDAR. The Multispectral Imaging, Detection, and Active Reflectance device combines FluidCam with high-intensity LED and laser light pulses to map and transmit 3D images of the sea floor at greater detail and depths. Chirayaths research will be on display April 2021 at the Universitys showcase exhibit during the eMerge Americas conference at the Miami Beach Convention Center.

Recently, he used MiDAR to conduct multispectral mapping of corals in Guam, validating the airborne images during subsequent dives.

Still, even MiDAR will not illuminate objects 4,000 meters deep. But install the device on a robot sub that can dive thousands of meters deep, and the possibilities of imaging the seafloor in the same detail and volume that satellites have mapped land are limitless, according to Chirayath.

It keeps me up at night, he said of MiDARs potential. He envisions his creation, awarded NASAs invention of the year in 2019, exploring not only the Earths deep oceans but worlds beyondfrom sampling minerals on Mars to looking for signs of life beneath the icy ocean moons like Jupiters Europa.

Chirayaths fascination with studying and surveying the ocean deep was born out of his love of the stars.

He grew up in Los Angeles, looking up at the stars and contemplating the possibility of life on other planets. As a youngster, he would attend open house events at NASAs Jet Propulsion Laboratory in nearby Pasadena, learning from the scientists and engineers who were building the Cassini space probe that explored Saturn and its intricate rings.

I knew at 5 years old that I wanted to work for NASA and make a contribution to discovering other worlds, Chirayath said.

By the time he was a teenager, astronomy had been his passion for more than half his life. It was also an escape, a methodology, he said, to deal with some of the challenges he faced at that time. I was homeless for about three years, and I used that time to sit on top of a mountain and do as much astronomy as I could, Chirayath noted.

At 16, he detected an exoplanet one and a half times the size of Jupiter and 150 light years from Earth in the constellation Pegasus, doing so with a consumer digital camera he modified and attached to a telescope. His refashioned scope allowed him to employ the transit photometry method for detecting exoplanets. Whenever a planet passes directly between a star and its observer, it dims the stars light ever so slightly. Chirayaths modified telescope detected just such a dip in light.

Earth- and space-based observatories that look continuously at stars for weeks and even months at a time use the technique. It took Chirayath three years to locate the planet, but his patience paid off in the form of a scholarship he won and used to help study theoretical physics at Moscow State University in Russia.He later transferred to Stanford University, where he earned his undergraduate degree.

To help pay the bills while he attended college, he worked as a fashion photographer for Vogue. His pictures have also appeared in Elle, The New York Times, and Vanity Fair.

He earned his Ph.D. in aeronautics and astronautics from Stanford University, reconnecting with his passion for astronomy and always asking himself, What can I do with small telescopes? How can I make an impact? How can I develop new technologies and explore our solar system?

He came to the University of Miami in 2021 after a decade-long career at NASAs Ames Research Center, where he founded and led its Laboratory for Advanced Sensing, inventing the suite of next-generation remote sensing technologies that are now the cornerstones of his work at ACES.

While at NASA, he also created NeMO-Net, a single player video game in which players help NASA classify coral reefs. The space agency awarded Chirayath with its 2016 Equal Employment Opportunity Medal for organizing its first participation in the San Francisco LGBT Pride Parade.

His fluid lensing mapping of the ocean promises to improve the resilience of coastal areas impacted by severe storms as well as assess the effects of climate change on coastal areas around the world.

While his origins are in astronomy, today he is more of a marine scientist than an astrophysicist. Still, the two fields are incredibly similar, Chirayath pointed out. Theyre both very difficult to study and require thinking beyond our terrestrial comfort zone. I love them both, and they can easily coexist. You can have large space observatories, and they can even help one another. A lot of the technologies that Ive created were inspired by things I learned in astrophysics and applied astronomy. But theres not that curiosity for understanding our own planet in a way that there is for space, and Im hoping to change that.

He applauds the $14 billion James Webb Space Telescope, which has been taking the deepest infrared images of our universe ever taken.

But weve never invested $14 billion into an ocean observatory, into something that looks critically at a piece of the puzzle that if we miss, we do so at our own peril, Chirayath explained. Im one of the many technologists who are looking inward and saying, This is what we understand about the universe and its large-scale structure, but a lot of the questions that are being posed to understand our universe and whats in it can also be posed for the ocean. If we dont map it, if we dont understand it, if were not able to characterize it, then when it fails or changes, humans may not be a part of the future.

The University of Miami is a Titanium Sponsor of eMerge Americas. Visit the Universitys research and technology showcase April 2021 at the Miami Beach Convention Center. Registration for an Unlimited TECH Pass is free for all University of Miami students and faculty and staff members.

More:

Ved Chirayath is on mission to map world's oceans - Mirage News

Space Launch: Who, What, and Where We’re Going – Andreessen Horowitz

For a full landscape of the commercial space market, see our previous post: Space: A Market Map.

Few achievements illustrate American Dynamism in a more visceral way than a rocket blasting off. It is, in a sense, controlled chaos the culmination of expertise in a number of scientific disciplines, harnessing explosive forces to escape our planets grip. In recent years, technical innovations and market opportunity have ushered in an ecosystem of new launch providers, and a domain once reserved for nations is now led by private companies.

Their simple goal is to put mass, in the form of commercial or government spacecraft, into orbit. Of course, this is literally rocket science, so theres actually nothing simple about it. Earths atmosphere and gravity attempt to restrain us, and although we regularly break free today, theres still much innovation to come if were going to truly open up space for anything beyond satellites and exploratory research missions.

This resurgence of the launch ecosystem is young, but segments are emerging. There are a lot of rocket companies, and more are popping up every year. What follows is an explanation of how the launch market works and where it might be headed.

Launch prices have dropped precipitously in recent years, expanding the potential for profitable applications. Notably, in this period, weve seen satellites dramatically shrink in size. But while they may differ in mass, they remain similar in principle:The largest segments of the space economy today are satellites transferring information through the electromagnetic spectrum. Doing this in space is really cheap, as it is on Earth, and is especially worth it if that data can only be supported by space-based infrastructure (e.g. remote sensors, satellite internet, GPS, etc.). As of now, information technology is the king of space and both commercial and government customers are driving demand.

Understandably, customers want to quickly and successfully reach orbit for the cheapest price. Reliability and speed aside, price is commonly measured in $/kilogram (kg). This is often expressed as the price per unit if the rocket is full; more practically, the lowest costs fall between $3,000/kg and $6,000/kg. This is due in part to reusability, scheduling, and volume requirements. However, most customers wont fill a rocket alone, as few companies have payload demands exceeding tens of thousands of kilograms.

Cost per launch better reflects the true price of reaching orbit. You can either fill the full payload capacity and achieve the lowest $/kg costs, or fill only a small fraction of the total capacity and pay more per unit. But the launch company charges the same price whether its at full capacity or empty. Naturally, rideshares enable multiple companies to split the cost per launch, which is why $/kg is commonly used for comparisons (more on this later).

For optimal efficiency and pricing, launch capacity would be matched to payload demand. Large rockets that arent filled end up being far more expensive than a smaller rocket that is fully filled; economical viability can trump technical capability, in that sense. The launch market is commonly categorized by how much mass the rocket can carry small, medium, heavy, super heavy. Ive elected to simplify this according to the groupings of customers and use cases, not just launch capabilities: Big rockets launch big payloads, often mega constellations, and Small / Medium rockets launch smaller payloads, enabling dedicated scheduling and deployment location for spacecraft.

Today, the launch market is roughly $12 billion, but is estimated to grow to $30 billion or more by 2030. The western launch providers that flew at least once in 2022 are illustrated below, including legacy players like United Launch Alliance (ULA) and Arianespace.

If you can fill them, big rockets are the cheapest per-unit launch option. The SpaceX Falcon 9 has proven to be the most effective vehicle for this market, making up a whopping 60 of the 91 western launches in 2022 and there is no close second. But that stat only illustrates whos dominating the launches: Unpacking the customers in this segment reveals broader insights about the launch market and where its headed.

Lets start with SpaceX. In 2022, over 50% of SpaceXs launches were dedicated to Starlink, which now makes up the majority of objects in low-Earth orbit (LEO). These are very full launches. Its worth noting here that Falcon 9s listed max payload 22,800 kg is for the expendable version; its reusable rocket version peaks at around 80% of listed capacity roughly ~18,000 kg for LEO. Even so, Starlink missions regularly pack in over 16,000 kg (approximately 50 satellites), and geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO) missions pack over 4,000 kg. In 2022, four of Falcon 9s launches were dedicated to U.S. government payloads, and three others were for allied governments.

For ULA, six out of eight launches on their Atlas V and Delta IV rockets flew U.S. government hardware. The majority of these government payloads are expensive, research-focused or classified, and demand reliability; they cant risk a failed launch.

SpaceXs Falcon Heavy found a unique use case in this government market, and its present usage illustrates the broader importance of matching rocket size with payload demand. Heavy was initially designed for the massive thrust to get large telecom satellites into GTO a highly elliptical orbit that circulates into geosynchronous orbit (GEO) with time, and is much easier to reach than heading to GEO directly. However, the Falcon 9 improved so much over the years that it stole this market from its sister rocket. In 2022, roughly 20% of Falcon 9s launches were for large commercial payloads entering GTO.

Though Heavys unit prices are very low when full, few customers will pay the $97 million launch price when the Falcon 9s $67 million cost maps better to their needs. Heavy would be flown for Starlink missions, but its payload volume is actually similar to the Falcon 9. Effectively, you cant fit more Starlinks in a Heavy anyway, so the added thrust is worthless. On top of this, difficulties with coordinating large enough launchpads makes scheduling difficult. Falcon Heavy only flew once last year, carrying heavy Space Force satellites directly to GEO.

Still, the majority of the launch market is in deploying large constellations in LEO. This will not just be Starlink. Other large telecom deployments, like Amazons Project Kuiper and OneWeb, will also demand high-volume, cheap launches. Given the competitive atmosphere, however, both of these constellations appear to be avoiding launching with SpaceX. Project Kuiper is looking at Arianespace, ULA, and, of course, Blue Origin for their future needs. And OneWeb selected Indias space program and Relativitys future rocket, Terran R. Additionally, OneWeb is launching a couple of payloads with SpaceX due to the last minute cancellation of their Russian Soyuz launches because of the war in Ukraine.

There is also significant demand from other satellite operators, albeit not at the scale of communication satellites. For example, since 2017, Planet Labs has launched from the Russian and Indian state space organizations, Arianespace, Rocket Labs, Northrop Grumman, and SpaceX. Today, of the ~7,000 satellites in various orbits, around 1,000 operate in a remote sensing capacity like Planet Labs.

Building and maintaining increasingly large constellations of satellites requires big rockets, and there is certainly demand in this market available to whoever is able to launch reliably. Noteworthy big rockets in development include:

Existing players will likely dominate this market, and steep development costs hundreds of millions, minimum put new entrants at a disadvantage. The majority of the satellites going into space will continue to belong to and be launched by SpaceX; the rest of the market will likely be fighting for chunks of other large constellations. Additionally, the loss of Russian launch has effectively taken offline around 20% of global capacity, and Amazon bought up nearly all remaining viable launch partners until around 2025. Many companies that started building smaller rockets, like Relativity and Rocket Lab, are now moving upmarket to meet this opportunity. Well see rockets get as large as regular payload demand can fill by some estimates, tens of thousands of satellites by 2030.

However, although larger rockets are potentially very profitable, there is still demand in the smaller market, buoyed by significant startup activity.

If you have a single, 200-kilogram satellite you want to get into LEO, you wont be buying out an entire Falcon 9. The common solution to this is to buy a ride with a big rocket thats already launching and is sharing capacity. Last year, for example, SpaceX operated 3 rideshares to LEO to serve this remainder market starting at roughly $6,600/kg.

However, like a bus, you are subject to their timelines and destinations and, frankly, youre competing for capacity against their own Starlink satellites. An additional concern, in some situations, is that precise deployment into a specific orbital position is impossible without a dedicated launch. Currently, there also is a two-year (or more) wait time for rideshare missions. Many smallsat companies are already dealing with tight timelines, so any uncertainty or waiting around for launch is painful. This reality has opened the door for smaller, dedicated launch providers that map closer to smaller payload demand and have more personalized schedules and destinations effectively, a space courier.

There are dozens of companies working in this segment. Because the rocket is smaller and has lower development costs, weve seen a bit more flexibility on launch system design: launching from a mid-flight plane, hypersonic platforms, kinetic first stage, and fully reusable rockets. Right now, Rocket Labs Electron is the leader in this small / medium launch category, flying nine times in 2022 (I wouldve placed Rocket Lab in the Big category, given Neutrons development, if not for the success of Electron). Others, like Astra and Firefly, also succeeded in launching last year, and more are just behind them.

Candidly, though, I expect this market to be tough. While there is demand for dedicated launch, and it will surely increase in the coming years, there will likely only be a handful of players (or fewer) with meaningful market share. Today, whoever can actually launch will get business, although I expect this to change as more systems go online. (However, even successful launches wont save you if the economics dont work out, as recently exhibited in the case of Virgin Orbit.) Reliability and scheduling will be important differentiators against bigger rockets, but within the smaller rocket ecosystem, cost will be a differentiator in order to win business. Price declines will likely fall into three categories:

Were also already seeing companies like Rocket Lab, Relativity, and Astra focus their efforts on building larger, cheaper per unit rockets, like the Neutron, Terran R, and Rocket 4. Small rockets want to become medium rockets, if not larger SpaceX, too, began with the small Falcon 1 before focusing on the bigger Falcon 9. Additionally, companies in this segment have extended into adjacent markets; Rocket Lab actually makes much of their revenue from their Photon spacecraft, and Astra is focusing revenue efforts on their acquired propulsion system. All of this to say that the size of this dedicated launch market remains unclear, and survival might require expanding into other, higher-margin, spaces.

More pessimistically, as the big launch market grows to fuel mega constellations and higher-energy orbit destinations, they might also operate more rideshares. These alone wont cover the development costs of big rockets, but they can still be profitable to launch on a regular basis and they will likely draw demand away from dedicated launch. Furthermore, the development of efficient satellite propulsion systems and space tugs might eliminate the desire for precise orbital drop offs. Rideshare could do the hard part, then you can find another way to go that last mile once in orbit.

As noted above, governments are also large buyers of launch services, and their involvement definitely matters when it comes to how the launch market will evolve. In fact, 109 of the 186 launches globally last year were dedicated to government payloads. When it comes to industries relevant to national security, governments will go out of their way to maintain a healthy industry of domestic suppliers and, of course, space is becoming increasingly critical.

Today, only a handful of nations can regularly enter orbit. There are effectively three players the United States, Russia, and China with distant rivals in Europe, India, Iran, Israel, and South Korea. Perhaps most concerningly, China has accelerated their launch efforts in recent years and plans to deploy a 13,000-satellite mega constellation of their own. In 2022, the launch geographic split looked like this:

There is global demand for launch; last year, SpaceX flew 3 missions consisting of foreign government hardware, and there are many international satellite companies seeking orbital access. The largest launch providers will remain in the largest economies, but growing international demand will likely be subsidized by the governments that want it and channeled toward domestic industry. The days of SpaceX launching German or Japanese government satellites will likely disappear.

If a nation doesnt have launch capacity, and can afford it, they will likely develop it. South Korea has recently achieved this, and Australia is attempting to follow later this year. However, accessible launch pads are a limiting factor here, as most countries lack good locations. Many of Europes launches, for example, take place in French Guiana. To address this, well likely see countries partner to develop shared launch pads, or focus on alternative launch methods that do not require them like launching from a mid-flight plane.

Why does launch capacity matter? Tactical response: the ability to quickly design and launch a spacecraft to replace a damaged satellite or other more kinetic things. A country with security concerns should not rely on another nation for this service. In time, I expect most advanced nations to develop a domestic launch industry, likely small payloads, if only to maintain rapid response capabilities in times of conflict. Tactical response is an explicit goal of the U.S. Space Force, and last year Firefly was selected to take part in the third TacRS exercise, Victus Nox

The rise of the commercial launch industry catalyzed the growth of the modern space economy both directly in orbit and in markets enabled by assets in space. Like the transcontinental railroads of the late 19th century, many of these companies will not survive, but their efforts will lay the foundation for a new frontier. No doubt, SpaceX has been the chief architect of this progress so far.

However, even with weekly Falcon 9 launches, it is still incredibly expensive to move mass into and around in space. This is in part because even the best rockets suffer from the tyranny of the rocket equation, a physics principle illustrating one of the fields great challenges that it takes propellant to lift propellant. While aircraft typically take off with around 50% of their mass being fuel, rockets hover around 85%, counting both fuel and oxidizer (liquid oxygen). To minimize total propellant needed for a mission, weight is shed mid-launch. Often this involves dropping the heavy and high-thrust first stage after ascending beyond the thicker parts of the atmosphere. By reducing weight mid-flight, achieving orbital velocity with the second-stage engine is easier. Typically, the second stage burns up in the atmosphere upon re-entry.

SpaceX has achieved a number of firsts here. Namely, pioneering rapid re-use of the first stage through vertical landing, and developing some of the best rocket engines with the Merlin and Raptor, the latter vying to be the first full-flow, methalox propulsion system to reach orbit. In terms of rocketry, this would be a significant achievement that helps balance specific impulse (fuel economy), propellant storage mass, and pure thrust tempering the tyranny of the rocket equation.

Like an aircraft, however, building a rocket is far more expensive than fueling it the Falcon 9s propellant costs are only around $200,000 per flight. By far the most expensive part of a rocket is the massive first stage, nearly 60% of the total cost for the Falcon 9. A reusable first stage amortizes this across a number of launches, now exceeding 10 for the Falcon 9. Naturally, reducing the largest cost factor shook the launch market.

The question now is: What is next for launch in its current state? Looking farther forward, what new opportunities will open up when the next step function decline in launch costs occurs?

A wave of new rocket companies seek to dethrone the Falcon 9 by achieving even greater reusability and further reducing production costs. Personally, Im excited for Stoke Spaces fully reusable rocket, Relativity Spaces 3D-printed engines, and Rocket Labs structural innovations in their Neutron launch system. Real competition in the launch market is coming, and its likely well see Falcon 9s dominance and margins erode as competition comes online.

However, SpaceXs Starship, a 100,000-kg-payload, fully reusable rocket will completely change the space ecosystem. And this is not just for deploying large volumes of Starlink satellites. Starship makes space markets of physical goods, and moving people, become very real possibilities.

While Starship will not launch at breakeven, nor severely undercut existing prices, it will nonetheless usher in an era of larger payloads, unconstrained by mass, for both in-orbit and deep space objectives realistically, something closer to $1000/kg would still shake up the market. A Starship sitting in LEO could also act as a gas station, fueling a web of spacecraft activity serving commercial stations and transporting assets throughout cis-lunar space. With Starship for logistics, budgets for a Moon base become comparable to other government research programs, and the supply chain necessary for a Mars colony becomes achievable.

Looking further ahead, we might envision a science-fiction-inspired single-stage space plane something like a Star Wars X-Wing that can take off from a standstill, reach cruising speeds, and then accelerate into deep space. Completely optimizing launch systems for specific atmospheres and speeds a transition from jet engines into rockets is incredibly difficult, but it is theoretically optimal when it comes to high-speed flight. At slower speeds, air-breathing jet engines would minimize the perils of carrying oxidizer, and wings enable assistance from aerodynamic lift. Reaching orbit is a speed, not an altitude, and if you leverage jet engines when accelerating in the thicker parts of the atmosphere, before igniting faster rocket engines, competing with Starship prices might be feasible. In this sense, one could consider many hypersonic companies as efficient launch booster stages. I remain hopeful that more advanced technology will make this sci-fi vision achievable, pioneering orbital access that mirrors modern air freight rates of around $2 to $5/kg.

Launch is the beautiful beginning of a never-ending journey. To reach orbit, let alone build a business out of it, is exceedingly difficult. In a world of increasing unseriousness, the sheer complexity of it all gives you hope, reflecting mankinds fiery spirit and deep, eternal curiosity for the mysteries of space.

* * *

The views expressed here are those of the individual AH Capital Management, L.L.C. (a16z) personnel quoted and are not the views of a16z or its affiliates. Certain information contained in here has been obtained from third-party sources, including from portfolio companies of funds managed by a16z. While taken from sources believed to be reliable, a16z has not independently verified such information and makes no representations about the enduring accuracy of the information or its appropriateness for a given situation. In addition, this content may include third-party advertisements; a16z has not reviewed such advertisements and does not endorse any advertising content contained therein.

This content is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be relied upon as legal, business, investment, or tax advice. You should consult your own advisers as to those matters. References to any securities or digital assets are for illustrative purposes only, and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Furthermore, this content is not directed at nor intended for use by any investors or prospective investors, and may not under any circumstances be relied upon when making a decision to invest in any fund managed by a16z. (An offering to invest in an a16z fund will be made only by the private placement memorandum, subscription agreement, and other relevant documentation of any such fund and should be read in their entirety.) Any investments or portfolio companies mentioned, referred to, or described are not representative of all investments in vehicles managed by a16z, and there can be no assurance that the investments will be profitable or that other investments made in the future will have similar characteristics or results. A list of investments made by funds managed by Andreessen Horowitz (excluding investments for which the issuer has not provided permission for a16z to disclose publicly as well as unannounced investments in publicly traded digital assets) is available at https://a16z.com/investments/.

Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others. Please see https://a16z.com/disclosures for additional important information.

Here is the original post:

Space Launch: Who, What, and Where We're Going - Andreessen Horowitz

10 Movies to Watch if You Loved 2001: A Space odyssey – MovieWeb

2001: A Space Odyssey is a name that is engraved into the emblems of science fiction. A film that has revolutionized the sci-fi genre and has been an inspiration to countless movies and TV shows. The movie's awe-striking visuals and cinematography are way ahead of their time and remain very relevant to pop culture to this day. 2001: A Space Odyssey has influenced films like Star Wars, Alien, and Interstellar, and its mesmerizing score has sparked the music industry into a renaissance.

The Kubrick Masterpiece has paved the way for several incredible sci-fi and space travel movies like Contact (1997) and Moon (2009), taking the space genre in cinemas to new heights. Today's world is home to some great films with similar immersive experiences to 2001: A Space Odyssey. And so we have curated for you a list of Movies to Watch if You Loved 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Silent Running is a sci-fi space drama directed by the visual effects maestro Douglas Trumbull. The movie is based on aspects like space journey, the future world, environmentalism, preservation, etc., and strongly links to 2001: A Space Odyssey. The world has seen the extinction of its flora and fauna, and the only existing plants and animals are now aboard a spaceship surviving inside domes. One such dome comprising a forest is tended by the botanist Freeman Lowell who has formed a deep connection with the living beings. Due to increasing expenses, the ship's crew are ordered to destroy the forests and return to Earth. Lowell refuses to abide by the orders and eventually flees with the ship with the help of his companion robots.

The movie focuses on his journey toward the unknown, filled with dramatic events to preserve the last surviving plants and animals. Silent Running is a thought-provoking film that emphasizes nature preservation and sheds light on isolation. An incredibly shot film with amazing visual effects that gives a certain vibe of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

RELATED: 12 Movies to Watch if You Love the Before Trilogy

The popular classic sci-fi horror film Alien was released in 1979 and was directed by Ridley Scott. The film focuses on a crew of the mining spacecraft Nostromo who answers a distress call on a distant planet on their way home. After landing, they discover a hive colony of eggs inside a strange ship. The horror aspects start when a facehugger hatched from the eggs attacks one of the crew members and plants an alien form inside him. The alien creature bursting out from the attacked individual starts stalking and killing the other crew members one by one.

The story is paced with jump scares and thrilling twists. The film revolutionized the sci-fi space genre by incorporating horror aspects to it. Even though the movie's core doesn't really relate to the one of 2001: A Space Odyssey, the film's blend of thriller and space certainly helps create the unique atmosphere.

The lesser-known successor to the highly acclaimed 2001: A Space Odyssey is our current pick, 2010: The Year We Make Contact (1984). The film, directed by Peter Hyams, is based on the later events of Kubrick's film and follows the crew of the spacecraft Leonov on their journey to Jupiter. The crew ventures to Jupiter to investigate the lost ship Discovery One and unravels several mysteries surrounding it. The film answers the secrets of the monolith and brings down curtains to the incredible duology.

Even though the film failed to reach the heights of its predecessor, 2010: The Year We Make Contact (1984) still managed to create a concrete footing in terms of cinematography, screenplay, special effects, and suspense.

The modern-day sci-fi film Annihilation is a horror thriller directed by Alex Garland. The film follows Lena Double (Natalie Portman), a biologist and former soldier who, searching for her husband, volunteers to enter an environmental disaster zone named "The Shimmer." Four scientists, including Lena, are sent into the mysterious, rapidly growing ecological zone to discover its secrets. They encounter strange phenomena and mutated creatures inside the area, and as they venture more and more, they face intense psychological effects.

Their journey to search out the root cause is filled with thrillers and horrors. The film sheds light on alien creatures and philosophical themes and keeps a constant sense of mystery. The film's unique cinematography and story remind us of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Based on the novel by Andy Weir comes the sci-fi adventure film The Martian. The film, directed by Ridley Scott, focuses on Mark Watney(Matt Damon), a NASA astronaut left alone to survive on Mars. The film starts with a group of astronauts on a mission on Mars when suddenly they are hit by a massive storm where Mark is impaled and assailed away. Mark is left alone to survive until the next mission arrives after his crew leaves him, presuming his death.

The movie portrays Mark's survival on the unhabitable planet through his wit and mental strength. As Mark faces issues with his acuity, like growing food, reestablishing communication, ensuring a safe habitat, etc., back on earth, NASA plans a dangerous mission to rescue him unharmed. The film is a representation of space survival and facing alien issues with ingenuity, which relates to 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Sunshine is a sci-fi thriller directed by Danny Boyle and released in 2007. The film follows the Icarus II mission crew, tasked to revive the sun and save humanity from mass extinction. Sun is dying, and Earth is about to face its eternal doom; in such circumstances, the Icarus II spacecraft is on a mission to reignite the sun using a bomb. With Cillian Murphy leading the cast, the crew aboard the ship faces hurdles one after another as they proceed toward their goal.

With issues like system failures, accidents, making contact with Icarus I, etc., the crew must give the ultimate test of perseverance to save life on Earth. The film is an intense space thriller, and its suspense creates a similar atmosphere to 2001: A Space Odyssey.

From the famed director Robert Zemeckis, comes the classic sci-fi film Contact. The film, released in 1997, is a drama thriller that follows Dr. Ellie Arroway (Jodie Foster), a SETI scientist who has worked all her life searching for Extraterrestrial intelligence. While facing many hurdles and skepticism, Dr. Ellie and her colleagues finally detect a signal of Extraterrestrial intelligence. They perform a seemingly impossible task with the help of a billionaire and send Dr. Ellie to make contact with Extraterrestrial life.

The film includes aspects like alien contact, space journey, skepticism, etc., and creates a great deal of mystery and suspense throughout. Contact incredible sci-fi film viewers would love to watch if they liked 2001: A Space Odyssey.

One of the cinematic feats of Christopher Nolan, Interstellar is a mind-bending sci-fi thriller adventure film. Favorite to many sci-fi lovers, Interstellar follows the story of Cooper (Matthew McConaughey), a former NASA pilot who is tasked to lead a mission to find a habitable planet. The Earth is now prone to disasters and droughts, and humanity suffers from intense food shortage; in such circumstances, Cooper and a team of scientists and two robots, TARS and CASE, venture on an immersive and dangerous interstellar journey. Along with their search for a habitable planet, they face intense time dilation, effects of relativity, gravitational anomalies, etc., and at times they are met with tough choices.

The movie brilliantly brings up concepts like black holes, wormholes, interstellar journeys, etc., and beautifully portrays the emotions and sacrifices of the characters. The movie's outwardly cinematography and screenplay are something that lovers of 2001: A Space Odyssey would love to enjoy.

RELATED:20 Great Movies to Watch for People In Their 20

Moon is a sci-fi mystery film directed by Duncan Jones and released in 2009. The sci-fi drama follows the story of Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell), who has been living on the Moon with a robot named GERTY for almost three years, working for a Helium mining company Lunar Industries. As he nears the end of his contract of three years with the company, Sam starts to face hallucinations and delusions. Suddenly he suffers a severe accident at his mining site, and after his recovery, he starts to discover several mysteries, which leads him to question the reality of his existence. Unearthing the company's dark secrets, Sams plans to return to Earth by himself.

The film is a brilliant representation of isolation, identity, psychological toll, living in space, etc. The film has incredible visual effects and screenplay and is a must-watch for the fans of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

From the great Andrei Tarkovsky comes one of the greatest sci-fi films to ever hit the silver screen, Solaris. This masterpiece of a sci-fi mystery was released in 1972 and focuses on the story of Kris Kelvin (Donatas Banionis), a psychologist tasked to investigate the strange abnormalities instilled by the planet Solaris. Kris is sent to the space station orbiting the planet Solaris after reports of the crew facing psychological events and hallucinations. After arriving, Kris also starts to face these occurrences, where he meets his wife, Hari, who has been dead for years. Upon further investigation, he begins to unravel the psychological mysteries of the planet, which also affects his psyche.

The film brilliantly explores human consciousness, the deeper meanings of life, and the impacts of memories. The film's imagery is exceptional, and its atmosphere and screenplay are like no other. This thought-provoking masterwork is a must-watch for any sci-fi fan and is a worthy contemporary to 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Link:

10 Movies to Watch if You Loved 2001: A Space odyssey - MovieWeb

Mars One – Wikipedia

This article is about the defunct Mars colonization firm. For the first Soviet spacecraft for Mars, see Mars 1. For other uses, see Mars 1 (disambiguation).

Defunct organization and company that promoted Mars colonization

Mars One was a small private Dutch organization that received money from investors by claiming it would use it to land the first humans on Mars and leave them there to establish a permanent human colony.[1][2][3] From its announcement in 2012 to its bankruptcy in early 2019, it is estimated to have received tens of millions of dollars.[4] The organization was not an aerospace company and did not manufacture hardware.[5]

Mars One consisted of two entities: the not-for-profit Mars One Foundation, and the for-profit company Mars One Ventures which was the controlling stockholder of the for-profit Interplanetary Media Group that also managed the broadcasting rights. The Mars One Foundation, based in the Netherlands, managed the project. The small organization had four employees,[6] and intended to make profits by selling media (documentaries) about the personnel selection, training and colonization.[7] The first mission was estimated by its CEO Bas Lansdorp to cost about $6 billion as of the 2010s.[7][8]

The concept had been criticized by scientists, engineers, and those in the aerospace industry as glossing over logistics and medical concerns, and lacking critical concepts about hardware. The concept had been called a suicide mission by academia, the spaceflight industry, and international news.[6] On 15 January 2019, a court decision was settled to liquidate the for-profit company, bankrupting it in the process.[9][10]

Mars One's original concept included launching a robotic Mars lander and Mars orbiter as early as 2020, to be followed by a human crew of four in 2024, and one in 2026 which would not be returning to Earth. Although the announcement garnered much international publicity, the concept has been criticized by scientists, engineers, and those in the aerospace industry.[11] Mars One is noted as being very short on funding, lacking critical concepts about hardware, life support, electrical power supply, and has been criticized as glossing over logistics, medical concerns, and protection against space radiation.[12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] The concept has been called a suicide mission in academia, spaceflight, and international news.[6][17][12]

By February 2015, two conceptual studies were done by contractors.[21] Despite the criticism and lack of funding, about 2,700 people applied to become one of the 24 finalists "to settle Mars".[7]

In December 2013, Mars One announced its concept of a robotic precursor mission. Originally scheduled for launch in 2020, the roadmap called for the launch to occur in 2022.[22] If funded, the robotic lander would be "built by Lockheed Martin based on the design used for NASA's Phoenix and InSight landers, as well as a communications orbiter built by Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd."[23] In February 2015, Lockheed Martin and Surrey Satellite Technology confirmed that contracts on the initial study phase begun in late 2013 had run out and additional contracts had not been received for further progress on the robotic missions. Plans were set in motion to raise the US$200 million needed to support the initial robotic mission,[21][23] but some critics[who?] did not find the economic plans to raise money from private investors and exclusive broadcasting rights to be sufficient to support the initial, or follow-on, mission(s).

Mars One selected a second-round pool of astronaut candidates in 2013. Mars One received interest from over 200,000 applicants for the first round. However, as candidate Joseph Roche asserted, the number of initial applicants who completed the application process was only 2,761,[24] which Mars One later confirmed via YouTube video.[25] The second-round pool was whittled down to 705 candidates (418 men and 287 women) in the beginning of May 2014. 353 were removed due to personal considerations.[26] After the medical physical requirement, 660 candidates remained.[25] The third round of candidate selection concluded in 2015. The remaining 100 candidates, known as The Mars 100, consisted of 50 men and 50 women who were slated to move forward to the next round, where 40 individuals would have been chosen through an interview process.[27]

On 30 June 2014, it was made public that Mars One was seeking financial investment through a bidding process to send company experiments to Mars. The experiment slots would go to the highest bidder and would include company-related ads, and the opportunity to have the company name on the robotic lander that was proposed to carry the experiments to Mars in 2018.[28]

In a video posted on 19 March 2015, Lansdorp said that because of delays in funding the robotic precursor mission, the first crew would not set down on Mars until 2027.[29][12] Following the criticism reported in The Space Review in October 2016 about funding mechanisms,[30] Mars One created Mars One Ventures.[31] In late 2016 Mars One had changed its first crewed mission date to 2032.[32]

In December 2013, mission concept studies for a robotic Mars lander were contracted with Lockheed Martin for a demonstration mission concept. It would be based on the design of the successful 2007 NASA Phoenix lander,[23][33] and provide proof of concept for a subset of the key technologies for a later human settlement on Mars.[34] Upon submission of Lockheed Martin's Proposal Information Package,[33] Mars One released a Request for Proposals[35] for the various payloads on the lander. The total payload mass of 44kg was divided among the seven payloads as follows:[35]

A robotic rover was proposed to be launched to Mars in 2022, in order to scout a landing site for the 2027 lander and a site for the Mars One colony. At the same time, a communication satellite would be launched, enabling continuous communication with the future landed assets. For 2024, six cargo missions were proposed, in close succession, consisting of two living units, two life-support units, and two supply units; a spacecraft transporting four astronauts was proposed to meet a transit vehicle bound for Mars. For 2025, the landing module transporting four astronauts was proposed to land on Mars. They envisioned the crew to be met by the rover, and taken to the Mars One colony.[36]

Notes:^a The initial concept timeline slipped 2 times, with a 2-year delay each time.[44]^b Work on robotic missions was suspended pending further review and future contract direction in February 2015.[21]^c SpaceX had no contracts with MarsOne and the project did not appear on their launch manifest.[45]

The Mars One team consisted of Chief Executive Officer and co-founder Bas Lansdorp, Chief Technical Officer and co-founder Arnold Wielders, Chief Medical Officer Norbert Kraft, Mission Concept Artist Bryan Versteeg, Senior Marketing Strategist KC Frank, and Chief Information Officer Tom Van Braeckel.[46]

Mars One's team of advisers consisted of over 30 industry and scientific experts,[47] including Mason Peck, Peter Smith, James R. Kass, K.R. Sridhara Murthi, Esther Dyson, and Robert Zubrin.

Mars One was not an aerospace company and would not have manufactured hardware.[5] Lansdorp had assumed all major components would be available in the aerospace market,[48] and had said Mars One had identified at least one potential supplier for each component of the mission.[49][50]

SpaceX mentioned in 2014 that they had been contacted by Mars One, but that accommodating Mars One requirements would require some additional work and that such action was not a part of the current focus of SpaceX.[51] SpaceX had no contracts with Mars One.[52][53] The first Mars One cargo mission to Mars was proposed to launch by 2022, followed by a crewed mission in 2024,[54] but without funds, hardware, and without a launcher it did not happen.[55]

A hypothetical crewed interplanetary spacecraft, for which there were no concept design studies, was to have been assembled in low Earth orbit and comprise two propellant modules: a Transit Living Module (discarded just before arrival at Mars) and a lander (see "Human Lander" below).[48][56] In 2012, Mars One speculated that the Transit Living Module might potentially be designed and built by Thales Alenia Space.[57]

A concept study was produced by Lockheed Martin for a demonstration lander based on the 2008 Phoenix lander.[42][23][33]

In December 2013 Mars One awarded a contract to Surrey Satellite Technology for a study of the satellite technology required to provide 24/7 communication between Earth and the Mars base.[58][59] Mars One proposed at least two satellites, one in areostationary orbit above Mars and a second at the Earth Sun L4 or L5 point to relay the signal when Mars blocks the areosynchronous satellite from line of sight to Earth.[59] It is possible that a third satellite would be required to relay the signal on the rare occasions when the Sun blocks the first relay satellite from line of sight with Earth.[59]

An early notional crewed lander was shown in concept art[when?] as a 5-meter (16ft)-diameter variant of SpaceX Red Dragon, but SpaceX declined to collaborate with Mars One.[45]

The crewed Mars rover was to have been unpressurized and claimed to be designed to be capable of supporting travel distances of 80km (50 miles).[60] One mentioned supplier for the rover in 2012 was Astrobotic Technology.[57][non-primary source needed]

On 12 March 2013, Paragon Space Development Corporation was contracted to develop concepts for life support and the Mars Surface Exploration Spacesuit System, and it included the pressure suit and the Portable Life Support System (PLSS) that could have permitted survival outside the habitat. The suggested supplier of the suits was ILC Dover.[61] The study was stated to be finished late summer 2013; Mars One released the results of this (ECLSS portion only) study to the public in June 2015,[62][63][64] but did not fund its research and development.

In 2013, Mars One signed a contract with Paragon Space Development Corporation, for a preliminary life support system concept study based on the International Space Station.[65] The idea was criticized because that system, as modern as it is, requires significant maintenance and supplies not available while on Mars.[66][67]

The application was available from 22 April 2013 to 31 August 2013.[68][69] This first application consisted of applicant's general information, a motivational letter, a rsum and a video. More than 200,000 people expressed interest. By 9 September 2013, 4,227 applicants[70] had paid their registration fee and submitted public videos in which they made their case for going to Mars.[71] The application fee varies from US$5 to US$75 (the amount depending on the relative wealth of the applicant's country).[72]

Distribution of the 1,058 applicants selected for Round 2 according to their academic degree[73]

Other (37%)

The applicants selected in this round were declared on 30 December 2013. A total of 1,058 applicants from 107 countries were selected.[23] The gender split was 586 males (55.4%) and 472 females (44.6%). Among the people that were selected to move on to round two, 159 have a master's degree, 347 have bachelor's degrees and 29 have Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) degrees. The majority of the applicants are under 36 and well educated.[74][75]

Medically cleared candidates were interviewed, and 50 men and 50 women from the total pool of 660 from around the world were selected to move on to the third round of the astronaut selection process:[76][77]

Applicants were remotely interviewed and recorded by Mars One over a relatively short Skype/SparkHire call regarding Martian-related orbital, temp/pressure, geological and historical parameters and the specific elements of the Mars One one-way mission.[24][78][79] Joseph Roche, one of the finalists, has accused the selection process of being based on a point system that is primarily dependent on how much money each individual generated or gave to the Mars One organization, despite many of the round three selectees having not spent any money in the process, apart from the application fee, which varied as a function of each applicant's country GDP.[24][78][79] Lansdorp acknowledges a "gamification" point system but denies that selection is based on money earned.[79] Roche also stated that if paid for interviews, they are asked to donate 75% of the payment to Mars One.[24][79] This was confirmed by Lansdorp.[24][79]

The company had intended that the regional selection may be broadcast as a reality television show documenting group challenges, but no deal was reached with TV producers. The audience was to select one winner per region, and the experts could select additional participants, if needed, to continue to the international level.[68] Of the 100 candidates, 40 individuals were to be chosen through an interview process.[80] Round 3 would take place after enough funding is secured for an "Earth-based simulation outpost."[80]

The remaining 40 candidates would be spending nine days in an isolation unit. The candidates are observed closely to examine how they act in situations of prolonged close contact with one another. It takes a specific team dynamic to be able to handle this, and the goal of this selection round is to find those that are best suited for this challenge. After the isolation round, 30 candidates would be chosen to undergo in a Mars Settler Suitability Interview.[81]

The Mars Settler Suitability Interview would have measured suitability for long-duration space missions and Mars settlement, and would last approximately 4 hours. 24 candidates would be selected after the interview and would be offered full-time employment with Mars One.[81]

From the previous selection series, six groups of four were to become full-time employees of the Mars One, after which they were to train for the mission. An MIT team noted that since the company is not developing the technology needed, it is unclear what the astronauts would be training for.[17][20] Mars One has stated that the teams selected were going to undergo a battery of training, ranging from psycho-social skills to engineering and scientific observation.[82]

Mars One funding came from astronaut application fees, donations, undisclosed private investment, intellectual property (IP) rights, and mostly, the potential sale of future broadcasting rights.[7][72] Over three-quarters of the funds reportedly went to concept design studies. Mars One states that "income from donations and merchandise have not been used to pay salaries". To date, no financial records have been released for public viewing.[83] Mars One initially estimated a one-way trip, excluding the cost of maintaining four astronauts on Mars until they die, at US$6 billion.[84] Lansdorp has declined questions regarding the cost estimate.[85]

Mars One's investment of revenues[86]

Concept design studies (78.3%)

Travel expenses (11.6%)

Legal expenses (3.3%)

Website maintenance (2.4%)

Communications (2.3%)

Office and other (2.1%)

A proposed global reality-TV show was intended to provide funds to finance the expedition, however, no such television show emerged and no contracts were signed. The astronaut selection process (with some public participation) was to be televised and continue on through the first years of living on Mars.[87]

Discussions between Endemol started in June 2014,[88][failed verification] producers of the Big Brother series, and Mars One ended with Endemol subsidiary Darlow Smithson Productions issuing a statement in February 2015 that they "were unable to reach agreement on the details of the contract" and that the company was "no longer involved in the project."[89] Lansdorp updated plans to no longer include live broadcasts, but instead would rely on documentary-style short films produced by the company Stateless Media.[90][91]

On 31 August 2012, the company announced that funding from its first sponsors were received,[84] and that the funds were used mostly to pay for two conceptual design studies performed by aerospace suppliers Lockheed Martin (lander) and Surrey Satellite Systems (orbiter).[84]

On 3 March 2014 Mars One announced a working agreement with Uwingu, stating that the program would use Uwingu's map of Mars in all of their missions.[92][93]

Total (from 113 countries): $928,888

Since the official announcement of their conversion to a Stichting foundation, Mars One began accepting donations through their website. As of 4 July 2016, Mars One had received $928,888 in donations and merchandise sales.[94] The 2016 donation update adds the Indiegogo campaign ($313,744) to the private donation and merchandise total.

On 10 December 2013, Mars One set up a crowdfunding campaign on Indiegogo to help fund a 2018 demonstration robotic mission that was not built. The alleged 2018 mission would have included a lander and a communications satellite to prove technologies in addition to launch and landing. The campaign goal was to raise US$400,000 by 25 January 2014. Since the ending date was drawing near, they decided to extend the ending date to 9 February 2014. By the end of the campaign, they had received $313,744. Indiegogo received 9% ($28,237).[95]

Trading of the shares of Mars One Ventures AG, listed on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange, was suspended on 5 February 2019 for non-compliance with the FSE regulations when the number of shares was increased in 2017.[96] In February 2019, it was reported that Mars One had declared bankruptcy in a Swiss court on 15 January 2019, and was permanently dissolved as a company.[97][98] The total debt is approximately 1 million.[96]

Mars One received a variety of criticism, mostly relating to medical,[99] technical and financial feasibility. There were also unverified claims that Mars One was a scam designed to take as much money as possible from donors, including reality show contestants.[100][101] Many criticized the project's US$6 billion budget as being too low to successfully transport humans to Mars, to the point of being delusional.[20][102] A similar project study by NASA estimated the cost of such a feat at US$100 billion, although that included transporting the astronauts back to Earth. Objections had also been raised regarding the reality TV project associated with the expedition. Given the transient nature of most reality TV ventures, many believed that as viewership declined, funding could significantly decrease, thereby harming the entire expedition. Further, contestants reported that they were ranked based on their donations and funds raised.[100][103]

John Logsdon, a space policy expert at George Washington University, criticized the program, saying it appeared to be a scam[102] and not "a credible proposition".[104]

Chris Welch, director of the Masters Programs at the International Space University, said "Even ignoring the potential mismatch between the project income and its costs and questions about its longer-term viability, the Mars One proposal does not demonstrate a sufficiently deep understanding of the problems to give real confidence that the project would be able to meet its very ambitious schedule."[105]

Gerard 't Hooft, theoretical physicist and ambassador[106] to Mars One, has stated that he thought both their proposed schedule and budget were off by a factor of ten.[24][107] He said he still supported the project's overall goals.[107]

A space logistics analysis conducted by PhD candidates at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology revealed that the most optimistic of scenarios would require 15 Falcon Heavy launches that would cost approximately $4.5 billion.[17] They concluded that the reliability of Environmental Control and Life Support systems (ECLS), the Technology Readiness Levels (TRL), and in situ resource utilization (ISRU) would have to be improved. Additionally, they determined that if the costs of launch were also lowered dramatically, together this would help to reduce the mass and cost of Mars settlement architecture.[17] The environmental system would result in failure to be able to support human life in 68 days if fire safety standards on over-oxygenation were followed, due to excessive use of nitrogen supplies that would not then be able to be used to compensate leakage of air out of the habitat, leading to a resultant loss in pressurization, ending with pressures too low to support human life.[17] Lansdorp replied that although he has not read all the research, supplier Lockheed Martin said that the technologies were viable.[108]

Another serious concern uncovered in the research conducted by MIT was replacement parts. The PhD candidates estimated the need for spare parts in a Mars colony based on the failure rates of parts on the ISS. They determined that a resupply mission every two years would be necessary unless a large space in the initial launch were to be reserved for extra materials. Lansdorp commented on this saying, "They are correct. The major challenge of Mars One is keeping everything up and running. We don't believe what we have designed is the best solution. It's a good solution."[108]

In March 2015, one of the Mars One finalists, Joseph Roche,[109] stated to media outlets that he believed the mission to be a scam. Roche holds doctorate degrees in physics and astrophysics, and shared many of his concerns and criticisms of the mission. These claims include that the organization lied about the number of applicants, stating that 200,000 individuals applied versus Roche's claim of 2,761, and that many of the applicants had paid to be put on the list. Furthermore, Roche claimed that Mars One was asking finalists for donations from any money earned from guest appearances (which would amount to a minimal portion of the estimated $6 billion required for the mission). Finally, despite being one of 100 finalists, Roche himself never spoke to any Mars One employee or representative in person, and instead of psychological or psychometric testing as is normal for astronaut candidates (especially for a lengthy, one-way mission), his interview process consisted of a 10-minute Skype conversation.[100][110]

In April 2015, Mars One's CEO Bas Lansdorp admitted that their 12-year plan for landing humans on Mars by 2027 was mostly fiction.[12]

Robert Zubrin, advocate for crewed Martian exploration, said "I don't think the business plan closes it. We're going to go to Mars, we need a billion dollars, and we're going to make up the revenue with advertising and media rights and so on. You might be able to make up some of the money that way, but I don't think that anyone who is interested in making money is going to invest on that basis invest in this really risky proposition, and if you're lucky you'll break even? That doesn't fly."[111] Despite his criticisms, Zubrin became an adviser to Mars One on 10 October 2013.[112]

Canadian former astronaut Julie Payette said during the opening speech for an International Civil Aviation Organization conference that she did not think Mars One "is sending anybody anywhere".[79]

In January 2014, German former astronaut Ulrich Walter strongly criticized the project for ethical reasons. Speaking with Tagesspiegel, he estimated the probability of reaching Mars alive at only 30%, and that of surviving there more than three months at less than 20%. He said, "They don't care what happens to those people in space... If my tax money were used for such a mission, I would organize a protest."[113]

Space tourist Richard Garriott stated in response to Mars One, "Many have interesting viable starting plans. Few raise the money to be able to pull it off."[114]

Former astronaut Buzz Aldrin said in an interview that he wants to see humans on Mars by 2035, but he does not think Mars One will be the first to achieve it.[115]

Wired magazine gave it a plausibility score of 2 out of 10 as part of their 2012 Most Audacious Private Space Exploration Plans.[116]

The project lacked current funding as well as sources for future funding.[117] The organization had no spacecraft or rocket in development or any contracts in place with companies that could provide a spacecraft or rocket. While plans point to SpaceX for both resources, the company had no contracts with Mars One in an industry that typically plans contracts decades in advance.[45]

More:

Mars One - Wikipedia

Colonization of Mars – Wikipedia

Proposed concepts for human settlements on Mars

Colonization or settlement of Mars is the theoretical human migration and long-term human establishment of Mars. The prospect has garnered interest from public space agencies and private corporations and has been extensively explored in science fiction writing, film, and art.

Organizations have proposed plans for a human mission to Mars, the first step towards any colonization effort, but no person has set foot on the planet, and there have been no return missions. However, landers and rovers have successfully explored the planetary surface and delivered information about conditions on the ground.

Mars' orbit is close to Earth's orbit and the asteroid belt. While Mars' day and general composition are similar to Earth, the planet is hostile to life. Mars has an unbreathable atmosphere, thin enough that its temperature on average fluctuates between 70 and 0C (94 and 32F), yet thick enough to cause planet-wide dust storms. The barren landscape on Mars is covered by fine dust and intense ionizing radiation. Mars has in-situ resources, such as underground water, Martian soil, and ore, which could be leveraged by colonists. Opportunities to generate electricity via wind, solar, and nuclear power using resources on Mars are poor.

Justifications and motivations for colonizing Mars include curiosity, the potential for humans to provide more in-depth observational research than uncrewed rovers, an economic interest in its resources, and the possibility that the settlement of other planets could decrease the likelihood of human extinction. Difficulties and hazards include radiation exposure during a trip to Mars and on its surface, toxic soil, low gravity, the isolation that accompanies Mars' distance from Earth, a lack of water, and cold temperatures.

Commitments to researching permanent settlement have been made by public space agenciesNASA, ESA, Roscosmos, ISRO, the CNSA, among othersand private organizationsSpaceX, Lockheed Martin, and Boeing.

Since the 20th century, there have been several proposed human missions to Mars both by government agencies and private companies.[vague]

Most of the human mission concepts as currently conceived by national governmental space programs would not be direct precursors to colonization. Programs such as those being tentatively planned by NASA, Roscosmos, and ESA are intended solely as exploration missions, with the establishment of a permanent base possible but not yet the main goal.[citation needed]

Colonization requires the establishment of permanent habitats that have the potential for self-expansion and self-sustenance. Two early proposals for building habitats on Mars are the Mars Direct and the Semi-Direct concepts, advocated by Robert Zubrin, an advocate of the colonization of Mars.[1]

At the February 2017 World Government Summit, the United Arab Emirates announced a plan to establish a settlement on Mars by 2117, led by the Mohammed bin Rashid Space Centre.[2][3]

SpaceX has proposed the development of Mars transportation infrastructure in order to facilitate the eventual colonization of Mars. The mission architecture includes fully reusable launch vehicles, human-rated spacecraft, on-orbit propellant tankers, rapid-turnaround launch/landing mounts, and local production of rocket fuel on Mars via in situ resource utilization (ISRU). SpaceX's aspirational goal as of 2017[update] was to land their cargo Starships on Mars by 2024 and the first 2 crewed starships by 2026.[4][5][needs update]

The surface gravity of Mars is just 38% that of Earth. Although microgravity is known to cause health problems such as muscle loss and bone demineralization,[7][8] it is not known if Martian gravity would have a similar effect. The Mars Gravity Biosatellite was a proposed project designed to learn more about what effect Mars' lower surface gravity would have on humans, but it was cancelled due to a lack of funding.[9]

Mars has a surface area that is 28.4% of Earth's, which is only slightly less than the amount of dry land on Earth (which is 29.2% of Earth's surface). Mars has half the radius of Earth and only one-tenth the mass. This means that it has a smaller volume (15%) and lower average density than Earth.

Due to the lack of a magnetosphere, solar particle events and cosmic rays can easily reach the Martian surface.[10][11][12]

Atmospheric pressure on Mars is far below the Armstrong limit at which people can survive without pressure suits. Since terraforming cannot be expected as a near-term solution, habitable structures on Mars would need to be constructed with pressure vessels similar to spacecraft, capable of containing a pressure between 30 and 100kPa. The atmosphere is also toxic as most of it consists of carbon dioxide (95%carbon dioxide, 3%nitrogen, 1.6%argon, and traces totaling less than 0.4% of other gases, including oxygen).

This thin atmosphere does not filter out ultraviolet sunlight, which causes instability in the molecular bonds between atoms. For example, ammonia (NH3) is not stable in the Martian atmosphere and breaks down after a few hours.[13]Also due to the thinness of the atmosphere, the temperature difference between day and night is much larger than on Earth, typically around 70C (125F).[14] However, the day/night temperature variation is much lower during dust storms when very little light gets through to the surface even during the day, and instead warms the middle atmosphere.[15]

Water on Mars is scarce, with rovers Spirit and Opportunity finding less than there is in Earth's driest desert.[16][17][18]

The climate is much colder than Earth, with mean surface temperatures between 186 and 268K (87 and 5C; 125 and 23F) (depending on the season and latitude).[19][20] The lowest temperature ever recorded on Earth was 184 K (89.2C, 128.6F) in Antarctica.

Because Mars is about 52% farther from the Sun, the amount of solar energy entering its upper atmosphere per unit area (the solar constant) is only around 43.3% of what reaches the Earth's upper atmosphere.[21] However, due to the much thinner atmosphere, a higher fraction of the solar energy reaches the surface as radiation.[22][23] The maximum solar irradiance on Mars is about 590 W/m2 compared to about 1000 W/m2 at the Earth's surface; optimal conditions on the Martian equator can be compared to those on Devon Island in the Canadian Arctic in June.[24] Mars' orbit is more eccentric than Earth's, increasing temperature and solar constant variations over the course of the Martian year.[citation needed] Mars has no rain and virtually no clouds,[citation needed] so although cold, it is permanently sunny (apart from during dust storms). This means solar panels can always operate at maximum efficiency on dust-free days.

Global dust storms are common throughout the year and can cover the entire planet for weeks, blocking sunlight from reaching the surface.[25][26] This has been observed to cause temperature drops of 4C (7F) for several months after the storm.[27] In contrast, the only comparable events on Earth are infrequent large volcanic eruptions such as the Krakatoa event which threw large amounts of ash into the atmosphere in 1883, causing a global temperature drop of around 1C (2F).These dust storms would affect electricity production from solar panels for long periods, and interfere with communications with Earth.[15]

Mars has an axial tilt of 25.19, similar to Earth's 23.44. As a result, Mars has seasons much like Earth, though on average they last nearly twice as long because the Martian year is about 1.88Earth years. Mars' temperature regime is more similar to Earth's than all other planets in the solar system. While generally colder than Earth, Mars can have Earth-like temperatures in some areas and at certain times.

The Martian soil is toxic due to relatively high concentrations of chlorine and associated compounds, such as perchlorates, which are hazardous to all known forms of life,[28][29] even though some halotolerant microorganisms might be able to cope with enhanced perchlorate concentrations by drawing on physiological adaptations similar to those observed in the yeast Debaryomyces hansenii exposed in lab experiments to increasing NaClO4 concentrations.[30]

Plants and animals cannot survive the ambient conditions on the surface of Mars.[31] However, some extremophile organisms that survive in hostile conditions on Earth have endured periods of exposure to environments that approximate some of the conditions found on Mars.

The Martian day (or sol) is very close in duration to Earth's. A solar day on Mars is 24 hours, 39 minutes and 35.244 seconds.[32]

Conditions on the surface of Mars are closer to the conditions on Earth in terms of temperature and sunlight than on any other planet or moon, except for the cloud tops of Venus.[33] However, the surface is not hospitable to humans or most known life forms due to the radiation, greatly reduced air pressure, and an atmosphere with only 0.16%oxygen.

In 2012, it was reported that some lichen and cyanobacteria survived and showed remarkable adaptation capacity for photosynthesis after 34days in simulated Martian conditions in the Mars Simulation Laboratory (MSL) maintained by the German Aerospace Center (DLR).[34][35][36] Some scientists think that cyanobacteria could play a role in the development of self-sustainable crewed outposts on Mars.[37] They propose that cyanobacteria could be used directly for various applications, including the production of food, fuel and oxygen, but also indirectly: products from their culture could support the growth of other organisms, opening the way to a wide range of life-support biological processes based on Martian resources.[37]

Humans have explored parts of Earth that match some conditions on Mars. Based on NASA rover data, temperatures on Mars (at low latitudes) are similar to those in Antarctica.[38] The atmospheric pressure at the highest altitudes reached by piloted balloon ascents (35km (114,000 feet) in 1961,[39] 38km in 2012) is similar to that on the surface of Mars. However, the pilots were not exposed to the extremely low pressure, as it would have killed them, but seated in a pressurized capsule.[40]

Human survival on Mars would require living in artificial Mars habitats with complex life-support systems. One key aspect of this would be water processing systems. Being made mainly of water, a human being would die in a matter of days without it. Even a 58% decrease in total body water causes fatigue and dizziness and a 10% decrease physical and mental impairment (See Dehydration). A person in the UK uses 70140litres of water per day on average.[41] Through experience and training, astronauts on the ISS have shown it is possible to use far less, and that around 70% of what is used can be recycled using the ISS water recovery systems. (For instance, half of all water is used during showers.[42]) Similar systems would be needed on Mars but would need to be much more efficient, since regular robotic deliveries of water to Mars would be prohibitively expensive (the ISS is supplied with water four times per year). Potential access to on-site water (frozen or otherwise) via drilling has been investigated by NASA.[43]

Mars presents a hostile environment for human habitation. Different technologies have been developed to assist long-term space exploration and may be adapted for habitation on Mars. The existing record for the longest consecutive space flight is 438days by cosmonaut Valeri Polyakov,[44] and the most accrued time in space is 878days by Gennady Padalka.[45] The longest time spent outside the protection of the Earth's Van Allen radiation belt is about 12days for the Apollo 17 moon landing. This is minor in comparison to the 1100-day journey to Mars and back[46] envisioned by NASA for possibly as early as the year 2028. Scientists have also hypothesized that many different biological functions can be negatively affected by the environment of Mars colonies. Due to higher levels of radiation, there are a multitude of physical side-effects that must be mitigated.[47] In addition, Martian soil contains high levels of toxins which are hazardous to human health.

The difference in gravity may negatively affect human health by weakening bones and muscles. There is also risk of osteoporosis and cardiovascular problems. Current rotations on the International Space Station put astronauts in zero gravity for six months, a comparable length of time to a one-way trip to Mars. This gives researchers the ability to better understand the physical state that astronauts going to Mars would arrive in. Once on Mars, surface gravity is only 38% of that on Earth. Microgravity affects the cardiovascular, musculoskeletal and neurovestibular (central nervous) systems. The cardiovascular effects are complex. On Earth, blood within the body stays 70% below the heart, but in microgravity this is not the case due to nothing pulling the blood down. This can have several negative effects. Once entering into microgravity, the blood pressure in the lower body and legs is significantly reduced.[48] This causes legs to become weak through loss of muscle and bone mass. Astronauts show signs of a puffy face and chicken legs syndrome. After the first day of reentry back to earth, blood samples showed a 17% loss of blood plasma, which contributed to a decline of erythropoietin secretion.[49][50] On the skeletal system which is important to support our body's posture, long space flight and exposure to microgravity cause demineralization and atrophy of muscles. During re-acclimation, astronauts were observed to have a myriad of symptoms including cold sweats, nausea, vomiting and motion sickness.[51] Returning astronauts also felt disoriented. Journeys to and from Mars being six months is the average time spent at the ISS. Once on Mars with its lesser surface gravity (38% percent of Earth's), these health effects would be a serious concern.[52] Upon return to Earth, recovery from bone loss and atrophy is a long process and the effects of microgravity may never fully reverse.[citation needed]

Dangerous amounts of radiation reach Mars' surface despite it being much further from the Sun compared to Earth. Mars has lost its inner dynamo giving it a weaker global magnetosphere than Earth does. Combined with a thin atmosphere, this permits a significant amount of ionizing radiation to reach the Martian surface. There are two main types of radiation risks to traveling outside the protection of Earth's atmosphere and magnetosphere: galactic cosmic rays (GCR) and solar energetic particles (SEP). Earth's magnetosphere protects from charged particles from the Sun, and the atmosphere protects against uncharged and highly energetic GCRs. There are ways to mitigate solar radiation, but without much of an atmosphere, the only solution to the GCR flux is heavy shielding amounting to roughly 15 centimeters of steel, 1 meter of rock, or 3 meters of water, limiting human colonists to living underground most of the time.[53]

The Mars Odyssey spacecraft carries an instrument, the Mars Radiation Environment Experiment (MARIE), to measure the radiation. MARIE found that radiation levels in orbit above Mars are 2.5 times higher than at the International Space Station. The average daily dose was about 220Gy (22mrad)equivalent to 0.08Gy per year.[54] A three-year exposure to such levels would exceed the safety limits currently adopted by NASA,[55] and the risk of developing cancer due to radiation exposure after a Mars mission could be two times greater than what scientists previously thought.[56][57] Occasional solar proton events (SPEs) produce much higher doses, as observed in September 2017, when NASA reported radiation levels on the surface of Mars were temporarily doubled, and were associated with an aurora 25-times brighter than any observed earlier, due to a massive, and unexpected, solar storm.[58] Building living quarters underground (possibly in Martian lava tubes) would significantly lower the colonists' exposure to radiation.

Much remains to be learned about space radiation. In 2003, NASA's Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center opened a facility, the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory, at Brookhaven National Laboratory, that employs particle accelerators to simulate space radiation. The facility studies its effects on living organisms, as well as experimenting with shielding techniques.[62] Initially, there was some evidence that this kind of low level, chronic radiation is not quite as dangerous as once thought; and that radiation hormesis occurs.[63] However, results from a 2006 study indicated that protons from cosmic radiation may cause twice as much serious damage to DNA as previously estimated, exposing astronauts to greater risk of cancer and other diseases.[64] As a result of the higher radiation in the Martian environment, the summary report of the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee released in 2009 reported that "Mars is not an easy place to visit with existing technology and without a substantial investment of resources."[64] NASA is exploring a variety of alternative techniques and technologies such as deflector shields of plasma to protect astronauts and spacecraft from radiation.[64]

Due to the communication delays, new protocols need to be developed in order to assess crew members' psychological health. Researchers have developed a Martian simulation called HI-SEAS (Hawaii Space Exploration Analog and Simulation) that places scientists in a simulated Martian laboratory to study the psychological effects of isolation, repetitive tasks, and living in close-quarters with other scientists for up to a year at a time. Computer programs are being developed to assist crews with personal and interpersonal issues in absence of direct communication with professionals on Earth.[65] Current suggestions for Mars exploration and colonization are to select individuals who have passed psychological screenings. Psychosocial sessions for the return home are also suggested in order to reorient people to society.

Various works of fiction put forward the idea of terraforming Mars to allow a wide variety of life forms, including humans, to survive unaided on Mars' surface. Some ideas of possible technologies that may be able to contribute to the terraforming of Mars have been conjectured, but none would be able to bring the entire planet into the Earth-like habitat pictured in science fiction.[66]

To be self-sustaining, a colony would have to be large enough to provide all the necessary living services. These include[67]

As the number of individuals grows, both activities and objects can be shared between them. Growth also will offset the risks of collapse of the society, caused by sudden deaths, accidents, infertility or inbreeding. But this may not prevent mortal combat between different groups of individuals, or the loss of efficiency due to inappropriate social organization.

By mathematical modelling of the time spent by people on these issues and by keeping things simple, Salotti concludes that the minimum number for a colony on Mars is 110.[67] This is close to other studies of the genetic problems involved in the longer journey to Proxima Centauri b (6,000+ years).[68]

Mars requires less energy per unit mass (delta V) to reach from Earth than any planet except Venus. Using a Hohmann transfer orbit, a trip to Mars requires approximately nine months in space.[69] Modified transfer trajectories that cut the travel time down to four to seven months in space are possible with incrementally higher amounts of energy and fuel compared to a Hohmann transfer orbit, and are in standard use for robotic Mars missions. Shortening the travel time below about six months requires higher delta-v and an increasing amount of fuel, and is difficult with chemical rockets. It could be feasible with advanced spacecraft propulsion technologies, some of which have already been tested to varying levels, such as Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket,[70] and nuclear rockets. In the former case, a trip time of forty days could be attainable,[71] and in the latter, a trip time down to about two weeks.[1] In 2016, a University of California, Santa Barbara scientist said they could further reduce travel time for a small robotic probe to Mars down to "as little as 72 hours" with the use of a laser propelled sail (directed photonic propulsion) system instead of the fuel-based rocket propulsion system.[72][73]

During the journey the astronauts would be subject to radiation, which would require a means to protect them. Cosmic radiation and solar wind cause DNA damage, which increases the risk of cancer significantly. The effect of long-term travel in interplanetary space is unknown, but scientists estimate an added risk of between 1% and 19% (one estimate is 3.4%) for males to die of cancer because of the radiation during the journey to Mars and back to Earth. For females the probability is higher due to generally larger glandular tissues.[74]

Mars has a surface gravity 0.38 times that of Earth, and the density of its atmosphere is about 0.6% of that on Earth.[75] The relatively strong gravity and the presence of aerodynamic effects make it difficult to land heavy, crewed spacecraft with thrusters only, as was done with the Apollo Moon landings, yet the atmosphere is too thin for aerodynamic effects to be of much help in aerobraking and landing a large vehicle. Landing piloted missions on Mars would require braking and landing systems different from anything used to land crewed spacecraft on the Moon or robotic missions on Mars.[76]

If one assumes carbon nanotube construction material will be available with a strength of 130GPa (19,000,000psi) then a space elevator could be built to land people and material on Mars.[77]A space elevator on Phobos (a Martian moon) has also been proposed.[78]

Phobos is synchronously orbiting Mars, where the same face stays facing the planet at ~6,028 km above the Martian surface. A space elevator could extend down from Phobos to Mars 6,000 km, about 28 kilometers from the surface, and just out of the atmosphere of Mars. A similar space elevator cable could extend out 6,000 km the opposite direction that would counterbalance Phobos. In total the space elevator would extend out over 12,000 km which would be below Areostationary orbit of Mars (17,032 km). A rocket launch would still be needed to get the rocket and cargo to the beginning of the space elevator 28 km above the surface. The surface of Mars is rotating at 0.25 km/s at the equator and the bottom of the space elevator would be rotating around Mars at 0.77 km/s, so only 0.52 km/s of Delta-v would be needed to get to the space elevator. Phobos orbits at 2.15 km/s and the outer most part of the space elevator would rotate around Mars at 3.52 km/s.[79]

Colonization of Mars would require a wide variety of equipmentboth equipment to directly provide services to humans and production equipment used to produce food, propellant, water, energy and breathable oxygenin order to support human colonization efforts. Required equipment will include:[1]

In order to function at all the colony would need the basic utilities to support human civilization. These would need to be designed to handle the harsh Martian environment and would either have to be serviceable while wearing an EVA suit or housed inside a human habitable environment. For example, if electricity generation systems rely on solar power, large energy storage facilities will also be needed to cover the periods when dust storms block out the sun, and automatic dust removal systems may be needed to avoid human exposure to conditions on the surface.[27] If the colony is to scale beyond a few people, systems will also need to maximise use of local resources to reduce the need for resupply from Earth, for example by recycling water and oxygen and being adapted to be able to use any water found on Mars, whatever form it is in.

Communications with Earth are relatively straightforward during the half-sol when Earth is above the Martian horizon. NASA and ESA included communications relay equipment in several of the Mars orbiters, so Mars already has communications satellites. While these will eventually wear out, additional orbiters with communication relay capability are likely to be launched before any colonization expeditions are mounted.

The one-way communication delay due to the speed of light ranges from about 3 minutes at closest approach (approximated by perihelion of Mars minus aphelion of Earth) to 22minutes at the largest possible superior conjunction (approximated by aphelion of Mars plus aphelion of Earth). Real-time communication, such as telephone conversations or Internet Relay Chat, between Earth and Mars would be highly impractical due to the long time lags involved. NASA has found that direct communication can be blocked for about two weeks every synodic period, around the time of superior conjunction when the Sun is directly between Mars and Earth,[82] although the actual duration of the communications blackout varies from mission to mission depending on various factorssuch as the amount of link margin designed into the communications system, and the minimum data rate that is acceptable from a mission standpoint. In reality most missions at Mars have had communications blackout periods of the order of a month.[83]

A satellite at the L4 or L5 EarthSun Lagrangian point could serve as a relay during this period to solve the problem; even a constellation of communications satellites would be a minor expense in the context of a full colonization program. However, the size and power of the equipment needed for these distances make the L4 and L5 locations unrealistic for relay stations, and the inherent stability of these regions, although beneficial in terms of station-keeping, also attracts dust and asteroids, which could pose a risk.[84] Despite that concern, the STEREO probes passed through the L4 and L5 regions without damage in late 2009.

Recent work by the University of Strathclyde's Advanced Space Concepts Laboratory, in collaboration with the European Space Agency, has suggested an alternative relay architecture based on highly non-Keplerian orbits. These are a special kind of orbit produced when continuous low-thrust propulsion, such as that produced from an ion engine or solar sail, modifies the natural trajectory of a spacecraft. Such an orbit would enable continuous communications during solar conjunction by allowing a relay spacecraft to "hover" above Mars, out of the orbital plane of the two planets.[85] Such a relay avoids the problems of satellites stationed at either L4 or L5 by being significantly closer to the surface of Mars while still maintaining continuous communication between the two planets.

The path to a human colony could be prepared by robotic systems such as the Mars Exploration Rovers Spirit, Opportunity, Curiosity and Perseverance. These systems could help locate resources, such as ground water or ice, that would help a colony grow and thrive. The lifetimes of these systems would be years and even decades, and as recent developments in commercial spaceflight have shown, it may be that these systems will involve private as well as government ownership. These robotic systems also have a reduced cost compared with early crewed operations, and have less political risk.

Wired systems might lay the groundwork for early crewed landings and bases, by producing various consumables including fuel, oxidizers, water, and construction materials. Establishing power, communications, shelter, heating, and manufacturing basics can begin with robotic systems, if only as a prelude to crewed operations.

Mars Surveyor 2001 Lander MIP (Mars ISPP Precursor) was to demonstrate manufacture of oxygen from the atmosphere of Mars,[86] and test solar cell technologies and methods of mitigating the effect of Martian dust on the power systems.[87][needs update]

Before any people are transported to Mars on the notional 2020s Mars transportation infrastructure envisioned by SpaceX, a number of robotic cargo missions would be undertaken first in order to transport the requisite equipment, habitats and supplies.[88]Equipment that would be necessary would include "machines to produce fertilizer, methane and oxygen from Mars' atmospheric nitrogen and carbon dioxide and the planet's subsurface water ice" as well as construction materials to build transparent domes for initial agricultural areas.[89]

As with early colonies in the New World, economics would be a crucial aspect to a colony's success. The reduced gravity well of Mars and its position in the Solar System may facilitate MarsEarth trade and may provide an economic rationale for continued settlement of the planet. Given its size and resources, this might eventually be a place to grow food and produce equipment to mine the asteroid belt.

Some early Mars colonies might specialize in developing local resources for Martian consumption, such as water and/or ice. Local resources can also be used in infrastructure construction.[90] One source of Martian ore currently known to be available is metallic iron in the form of nickeliron meteorites. Iron in this form is more easily extracted than from the iron oxides that cover the planet.

Another main inter-Martian trade good during early colonization could be manure.[91] Assuming that life doesn't exist on Mars, the soil is going to be very poor for growing plants, so manure and other fertilizers will be valued highly in any Martian civilization until the planet changes enough chemically to support growing vegetation on its own.

Solar power is a candidate for power for a Martian colony. Solar insolation (the amount of solar radiation that reaches Mars) is about 42% of that on Earth, since Mars is about 52% farther from the Sun and insolation falls off as the square of distance. But the thin atmosphere would allow almost all of that energy to reach the surface as compared to Earth, where the atmosphere absorbs roughly a quarter of the solar radiation. Sunlight on the surface of Mars would be much like a moderately cloudy day on Earth.[92]

Space colonization on Mars can roughly be said to be possible when the necessary methods of space colonization become cheap enough (such as space access by cheaper launch systems) to meet the cumulative funds that have been gathered for the purpose.

Although there are no immediate prospects for the large amounts of money required for any space colonization to be available given traditional launch costs,[93][full citation needed] there is some prospect of a radical reduction to launch costs in the 2020s, which would consequently lessen the cost of any efforts in that direction. With a published price of US$62 million per launch of up to 22,800kg (50,300lb) payload to low Earth orbit or 4,020kg (8,860lb) to Mars,[94] SpaceX Falcon 9 rockets are already the "cheapest in the industry".[95] SpaceX's reusable plans include Falcon Heavy and future methane-based launch vehicles including the Starship. If SpaceX is successful in developing the reusable technology, it would be expected to "have a major impact on the cost of access to space", and change the increasingly competitive market in space launch services.[96]

Alternative funding approaches might include the creation of inducement prizes. For example, the 2004 President's Commission on Implementation of United States Space Exploration Policy suggested that an inducement prize contest should be established, perhaps by government, for the achievement of space colonization. One example provided was offering a prize to the first organization to place humans on the Moon and sustain them for a fixed period before they return to Earth.[97]

Since Mars is much closer to the asteroid belt than Earth is, it would take less Delta-v to get to the Asteroid belt and return minerals to Mars. One hypothesis is that the origin of the Moons of Mars (Phobos and Deimos) are actually Asteroid captures from the Asteroid belt.[98] 16 Psyche in the main belt could have over $10,000 Quadrillion Dollars worth of minerals. NASA is planning a mission for October 10, 2023 for the Psyche orbiter to launch and get to the asteroid by August 2029 to study.[99] 511 Davida could have $27 quadrillion Dollars worth of minerals and resources.[100] Using the moon Phobos to launch spacecraft is energetically favorable and a useful location from which to dispatch missions to main belt asteroids.[101] Mining the asteroid belt from Mars and its moons could help in the colonization of Mars.[102][103][104]

Caves would naturally provide a degree of insulation from Martian hazards for humans on the planet.[105] These hazards include radiation, impactor events, and the wide range in temperatures on the surface.[105]

Mars Odyssey found what appear to be natural caves near the volcano Arsia Mons. It has been speculated that settlers could benefit from the shelter that these or similar structures could provide from radiation and micrometeoroids. Geothermal energy is also suspected in the equatorial regions.[106]

A team of researchers which presented at Geological Society of America Connects 2022 identified some 139 caves worth exploring as potential shelters.[105] Each was within 60 miles of a location ideal for use as a landing site and had been imaged in high-resolution by HiRISE.[105]

Several possible Martian lava tube skylights have been located on the flanks of Arsia Mons. Earth based examples indicate that some should have lengthy passages offering complete protection from radiation and be relatively easy to seal using on-site materials, especially in small subsections.[107]

Hellas Planitia is the lowest lying plain below the Martian geodetic datum. The atmospheric pressure is relatively higher in this place when compared to the rest of Mars.

Robotic spacecraft to Mars are required to be sterilized, to have at most 300,000 spores on the exterior of the craftand more thoroughly sterilized if they contact "special regions" containing water,[108][109] otherwise there is a risk of contaminating not only the life-detection experiments but possibly the planet itself.

It is impossible to sterilize human missions to this level, as humans are host to typically a hundred trillion microorganisms of thousands of species of the human microbiome, and these cannot be removed while preserving the life of the human. Containment seems the only option, but it is a major challenge in the event of a hard landing (i.e. crash).[110] There have been several planetary workshops on this issue, but with no final guidelines for a way forward yet.[111] Human explorers would also be vulnerable to back contamination to Earth if they become carriers of microorganisms should Mars have life.[112]

It is unforeseen how the first human landing on Mars will change the current policies regarding the exploration of space and occupancy of celestial bodies. In the 1967 United Nations Outer Space Treaty, it was determined that no country may take claim to space or its inhabitants. Since the planet Mars offers a challenging environment and dangerous obstacles for humans to overcome, the laws and culture on the planet will most likely be very different from those on Earth.[113] With Elon Musk announcing his plans for travel to Mars, it is uncertain how the dynamic of a private company possibly being the first to put a human on Mars will play out on a national and global scale.[114][115] NASA had to deal with several cuts in funding. During the presidency of Barack Obama, the objective for NASA to reach Mars was pushed to the background.[116] In 2017, president Donald Trump promised to return humans to the Moon and eventually Mars,[117] effectively taking action by increasing NASA budget with $1.1 billion,[118] and mostly focus on the development of the new Space Launch System.[119][120]

Space colonization in general has been discussed as continuation of imperialism and colonialism,[121] especially regarding Mars colonial decision making and reasons for colonial labor[122] and land exploitation have been questioned with postcolonial critique. Seeing the need for inclusive[123] and democratic participation and implementation of any space and Mars exploration, infrastructure, or colonialization, many have called for dramatic sociological reforms and guarantees to prevent racism, sexism, and other forms of prejudice.[124]

The narrative of space exploration as a "New Frontier" has been criticized as unreflected continuation of settler colonialism and manifest destiny, continuing the narrative of colonial exploration as fundamental to the assumed human nature.[125][126][127]

The predominant perspective of territorial colonization in space has been called surfacism, especially comparing advocacy for colonization of Mars opposed to Venus.[128][129]

One possible ethical challenge that space travelers might face is that of pregnancy during the trip. According to NASA's policies, it is forbidden for members of the crew to engage in sex in space. NASA wants its crew members to treat each other like coworkers would in a professional environment. A pregnant member on a spacecraft is dangerous to all those aboard. The pregnant woman and child would need additional nutrition from the rations aboard, as well as special treatment and care. The pregnancy would impinge on the pregnant crew member's duties and abilities. It is still not fully known how the environment in a spacecraft would affect the development of a child aboard. It is known however that a fetus would be more susceptible to solar radiation in space, which would likely have a negative effect on its cells and genetics.[131] During a long trip to Mars, it is likely that members of craft may engage in sex due to their stressful and isolated environment.[132]

Mars colonization is advocated by several non-governmental groups for a range of reasons and with varied proposals. One of the oldest groups is the Mars Society who promote a NASA program to accomplish human exploration of Mars and have set up Mars analog research stations in Canada and the United States. Mars to Stay advocates recycling emergency return vehicles into permanent settlements as soon as initial explorers determine permanent habitation is possible.

Elon Musk founded SpaceX with the long-term goal of developing the technologies that will enable a self-sustaining human colony on Mars.[114][133] Richard Branson, in his lifetime, is "determined to be a part of starting a population on Mars. I think it is absolutely realistic. It will happen... I think over the next 20 years," [from 2012] "we will take literally hundreds of thousands of people to space and that will give us the financial resources to do even bigger things".[134]

Author Robert Zubrin has been a major advocate for Mars exploration and colonization for many years. He is a member of the Mars society and has authored several fiction and nonfiction books about the subject. In 1996 he wrote The Case for Mars: The Plan to Settle the Red Planet and Why We Must. He continues to advocate for Mars and space exploration with his most recent book being The Case for Space: How the Revolution in Spaceflight Opens Up a Future of Limitless Possibility.

In June 2013, Buzz Aldrin, American engineer and former astronaut, and the second person to walk on the Moon, wrote an opinion, published in The New York Times, supporting a human mission to Mars and viewing the Moon "not as a destination but more a point of departure, one that places humankind on a trajectory to homestead Mars and become a two-planet species".[135] In August 2015, Aldrin, in association with the Florida Institute of Technology, presented a "master plan", for NASA consideration, for astronauts, with a "tour of duty of ten years", to colonize Mars before the year 2040.[136]

A few instances in fiction provide detailed descriptions of Mars colonization. They include:

See the rest here:

Colonization of Mars - Wikipedia

Is colonizing Mars even a good idea? You can’t breathe, after all

BREVARD COUNTY, Fla. Elton John might have said it best in his iconic song"Rocket Man""Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids."

More than 50 years after we sent humans to the moon the closest celestial body to Earth the plan is still to head to Mars, something many astronauts who have flown in space thought we would have alreadyaccomplished.

"I just assumed by the time I got to be old enough to go into the space program, you know we'd be living on Mars or I'd be working on Mars just as a scientist," Mae Jemison, thefirst African American woman in space,told university students at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex in December 2019.

But despite the fact humankind has been unable to send anyone to another place in the universe besides the moon, there are still many with the hopes and expectation that we will become a multi-planetary species in the near future, starting with our red next-door neighbor.

Billionaire entrepreneurs like Elon Musk and aspiring young astronauts like Alyssa Carson, a sophomore studying astrobiology at Florida Tech, hope to one day live on Mars.

"Eventually the sun will run out of fuel to burn and conditions on Earth are going to be very different from our normal regular life now," Carson told Florida Today, part of the USA TODAY Network. "It's not necessarily saying Mars is the savior here but Mars is that first step in getting people a bit more accustomed to even thinking about living on other planets and being able to colonize someplace else."

Even Musk's aerospace company, SpaceX, was founded with the "ultimate goal of enabling people to live on other planets," according to its website.

But how feasible is that?Do we want to settle on a planet where we can't even breathe?

According to NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine, we have the technological capability to go to Mars. The problem is money, or lack thereof.

Under Space Policy Directive 1, President Donald Trump tasked NASA with sending the next man and first woman to the moon by 2024 and then eventually heading on to Mars. But this isn't the first time a president has said we're going back to the moon or we're finally sending humans to the Red Planet.

After John F. Kennedy made his declaration that we would "put a man on the moon," several other presidents have tried to walk in his footsteps. But unlike Kennedy, none have come close to succeeding.

On the 20th anniversary of Apollo 11 in 1989, President George H.W.Bush said we would return to the moon and go on to Mars, but in the end, the priceprovedtoo high.

His sonPresident George W. Bush echoed the same goal.

Under the Constellation program, the plan was to return to the moon by 2020 and then head to Mars, but the project was ultimately scrapped after a series of delays and increasingly high costs.

President Barack Obama also hoped to go to Mars. Instead of proposing returning to the moon, however, Obama said we should send astronauts to an asteroid by 2025 before moving on to Mars. Congressional Republicans rejected the idea, andnothing came to fruition.

NASA Administrator discusses crewed missions to Mars

NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine discusses NASA's ability to send humans to Mars

Rachael Joy, Florida Today

Then cameTrump's turn.

After heading back to the moon in the next four years under the Artemis program, the next big milestone would be a trip to Mars.

But again, the problem boils down to spending what's necessary to send astronauts there, Bridenstine said.

"The question isn't whether or not we're technologically capable of doing it, because we are. The question is whether or not we have the political will to do it,"hetold reporters at Kennedy Space Center in July for NASA's Mars Perseverance rover launch.

The Apollo program, Bridenstine pointed out, was driven by the need to beat the Soviet Union to the moon, which is why Congress appropriated vast sums of money to NASA. Today, that's no longer the case.

With no Cold War to encourage federal spending on the program, NASA instead is looking to international partners to help pay for any trip to Mars.

"Today we don't have thatlarge power competition that we had back then, but what we do have is we have international partners, we have commercial partners, we have technological advances that are so far beyond what we had in the 1960s," Bridenstine said. "So the answer is yes, we can do it. The question is: Will we receive the budgetto do it right now?"

It is unclear how much support the incoming Biden administrationis going to give the Artemis program.

Money isalso anissue for SpaceX's Mars plans.

As a private company, SpaceX can't rely solely on taxpayer dollars to send humans there. Instead, the aerospace company is looking for other revenue streams to help pay for a Mars mission, such as its Starlink internet constellation.

Aside from providing internet connection to people living in remote areas around the world, Starlink will also help fund SpaceX's goal of having people live on Mars or at least, that's the plan.

But first, Starlink has to be successful.

Not everyone believes sending people to live on Mars is the right move, however.

Bill Nye, CEO for the Planetary Society and famously known as "Bill Nye the Science Guy" for his TV show that aired in the '90s, is one of those who doesn't believe in setting up camp on Mars.

"I would love to go to space, you guys.But this idea of living on another world where we can't be outside just doesn't sound that appealing," Nye told reporters in 2019 before the launch of the Light Sail 2 project he and other Planetary Society members had worked on.

"You think you want to go to Venus?We'd be vaporized in a second, way less than a second," Nye said. "And then on Mars, there's nothing to breathe. There's nothing to breathe, people. It's not just there's nothing to eat, there's nothing to breathe. So, you know if you live in a dome and you go outside, you're going to put on a spacesuit and you're in another dome, like my good friend Sandy the squirrel," referencing the character from the children's TV show"SpongeBob SquarePants."

And as of now, that's really the only option for humans to live on Mars a dome. It would essentially be like how actor Matt Damon' character lived in the sci-fi film "The Martian."

Even the author of "The Martian," on which the sci-fi film is based, doesn't believe we're close to having a human settlement on Mars.

"Mars is horribly inhospitable," Andy Weir told Florida Today via email. "Though it's an awesome idea living on Mars it would be far easier to colonize Earth's ocean floor. There won't be a significant settlement on Mars until there's an economic reason for a city to exist there. Like Antarctica,the only people there are researchers because there's no reason to be there otherwise."

So like Nye, Weir isn't inclined live on Mars.

Bill Nye doesn't think humans should live on Mars

Bill Nye, CEO of the Planetary Society, talks to FLORIDA TODAY reporters Antonia Jaramillo and Rachael Joy about the idea of humans living on Mars.

Staff, FLORIDA TODAY

"Nope! I write about brave people, but I'm not one of them," Weir said."I like Earth and plan to stay."

Others argue there's another way to live on Mars that doesn't include living in a dome. The only problem is the logistics ofchanging the Martian landscape into one that can support human life.

Called "terraforming," this essentially involves transforming Mars into a more Earth-like habitat. It's what Musk has proposed doing and what astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson believes would be best if humans were to live on Mars.

Elon Musk has a plan. Hes thinking of putting satellites in orbit that have big reflectors that focus sunlight that would otherwise miss the planet. Focus it down on the planet and just add more energy to the planet, heating it up, and if you do it right, you might be able to set sort of a chain reaction in place," deGrasse Tyson said in his podcast, "StarTalk."

"If everything is frozen and it gets warmer, youll evaporate more carbon dioxide, and thatll help trap more heat, and then thatll make it hotter to evaporate even more carbon dioxide," he said. "You get all of that out of the system and into the atmosphere. Then now its warm enough, now youre still mostly greenhouse gases, you still need oxygen to breathe. So now you put microorganisms that eat the CO2 and they release oxygen.

But terraforming Mars isn't going to happen anytime soon. Not only is the technology not available to do so, but the question also becomes, "How long would that take?"

Thats the big problem. Is it a thousand years, is it a million years? Or can you speed it up with some fast-acting microbes? This remains to be established, deGrasse Tyson said. But Im telling you that if were going to be a two-planet species, Im thinking you have to terraform Mars for that to happen.

Yet not everybody agrees with that tactic, especially because that would change the whole geology of Mars.

"Ive never been someone that has been a fan of terra-transforming a planet to make it more Earth-like. I think that the excitement of going to a different planet would be utilizing the in-situ resources that are there," NASA astronaut Christina Koch told deGrasse Tyson on his podcast.

"So, I would see something like a sustainable Mars establishment, to me, would always require some type of resupply, and even if thats just to make it livable and habitable in terms of what humans think of as habitable and livable, I think is the important thing. But using the in-situ resources as well, she said.

In other words, living in that dome-like structure.

Florida Tech professor and plant biochemist Andrew Palmer also believes using in-situ resources to live on Mars is the best plan.

He, along with other researchers at the universityare collaborating on how future Marssettlers can use the resources, namely the soil on Mars to grow their own food.

"So the whole premise of this project, it all falls under something that's called in-situ resource utilization, which is a simple way of just saying using what's already there. So what we want to do is establish how little do you need to bring from Earth in order to be self-sufficient," Palmer told Florida Today."Mars is about six months away. If something goes wrong on Mars and you're unable to get a rocket to Mars to rescue people, they need to have their own food."

By studying various simulated Martian soils, Palmer and his colleagues hope to determine what elseis neededto help grow crops on Mars, especially since the Martian soil may not be able to host plant life.

Florida Tech to find right Mars soil to grow plants on the red planet

Dr. Andrew Palmer , fellow professors and his grad students are working on growing plants in simulated Mars soil for sustainability on Mars.

Malcolm Denemark, FLORIDA TODAY

"IfI go take a sample of soil on Florida Tech campus and then I went out beachside and I took a soil sample there, those are not going to be the same, and the same is true on Mars," Palmer said.

That's problematic for future Mars settlers. What if they get to Mars and all of a sudden they can't grow anything there?

To avoid that, Palmer suggests sending a robotic greenhouse in advance.

"In our mind, one way to do this would be you land robots there six months in advance, and you inflate a tent and you start working on the soil, all remotely, and colonists get there and the soil is ready to grow," Palmer said.

When discussing what crops would be best to grow on Mars and what other nutrients settlers would need, Palmer recommends crops like potatoes, corn, radishes andkale. As for protein, Palmer says, insects are the way to go.

"Trying to grow a cow on Mars, that's a huge amount of resource investment,but growing insects, it's a very cheap investment, relatively speaking," Palmer said.

The other option could be to grow synthetic meats.

Besides just the different eating habits and living arrangements humans would have to get accustomed to if they lived on Mars, life would be very different from Earth, perhaps more environmentally friendly, becausenearly everything would have to be recycled.

But that might not be all that enticing to future colonists.

"In a Martian colony, (the settlers) willhave never not had water that was made fromprevious urine, andtheir entire world will be completely recycled and reused," Palmer said.

But even with a Mars establishment, others don't believe Mars should be the final destination or a "colony" at all.

"I think going to Mars is fineit's not a final place to go. I mean, you know, it's like just going to the moon but it's a little further out," the late Apollo 15 astronaut Al Worden told Florida Today in November 2019.

"When the sun burns out, Mars is going to go too, along with the Earth," Worden said. "We'd be better off solving all the problems we've got here (on Earth) than colonizing Mars. What we need is an Earth-like planet in another solar system somewhere."

But if humans haven't even been able to head back to the moon since 1972, the odds of trying to head to a planet in another solar system isnothingmore thanscience fiction at this point.

Apollo 15 astronaut Al Worden doesn't believe in colonizing Mars

At Florida Tech, Apollo 15 astronaut Al Worden explained why he doesn't believe in colonizing Mars & where we could eventually live (Alpha Centauri)

Rachael Joy, Florida Today

Technological challengesaside, will humans even live long enough to travel and settle on another planet?

"That's my greatest concern," Worden said. "We're not very good to each other here, and we don't seem to care about the things that will sustain this place to live in for a long time. I think we're doing more damage to ourselves and the planet that it may be of such an extent that we don't have to wait till the sun burns outwe're going to do it ourselves."

He's not the only one who thinks so.

In a July 2019 Pew Research Center study, 63% of Americans said NASA's top priorities should be using space to monitor key parts of Earths climate system. Meanwhile, only 13% believe sending astronauts to the moon should be a top priority. That figure jumps to a mere 18% for a crewed mission to Mars.

Former NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver wrote an op-ed piece for The Washington Postin 2019stating NASA should focus its resources on saving our planet instead of heading to other celestial bodies.

"The public is right about this. Climate change not Russia, much less China is todays existential threat. Data from NASA satellites show that future generations here on Earth will suffer from food and water shortages, increased disease and conflict over diminished resources," Garver said.

Instead of focusing on sending humans to the moon or Mars, Garver said, NASA should create a Climate Corps"in which scientists and engineers spend two years in local communities understanding the unique challenges they face, training local populations and connecting them with the data and science needed to support smart, local decision-making."

"Apollos legacy should not be more meaningless new goals and arbitrary deadlines," Garver said. "Lets not repeat the past. Lets try to save our future. Besides, humanitys intrinsic need to explore is driven by our need to survive."

The coronavirus pandemicleads toanother important question about interplanetary travel:What if we got stuck with another pandemic, only this time while humans were in space?

It's hard enough to live on a planet where you can't breathe, let alone have a highly contagious virus spreading like wildfire.

A key thing we have come to understand from COVID-19 is those with weaker immune systems have a harder time recovering. For the future explorers venturing to live on Mars, they might all end up having weak immune systems.

A study published last yearby NASA scientists revealed astronauts who have endured long space voyages such as the shuttle missions and International Space Station flightswere more vulnerable to diseasessuch as herpes, chickenpox and shingles.

The cause? Pretty much what youd expect from any potentially treacherous space voyage: stress.

So far, 47 out of 89 (53%) astronauts from short-duration space shuttle flights, and 14 out of 23 (61%) from long-duration ISS spaceflight missions shed at least one or more herpes viruses in their saliva or urine samples, the study states.

When astronauts venture out into space, they are faced with several extraterrestrial hazards, including cosmic radiation, microgravity and gravitational forces like acceleration and deceleration.

But those aren't the only stress factors they're exposed to. Throughout an astronaut's space mission, they are forced to endure social separation, confinement, sleep deprivation, circadian rhythm disruption and increased anxiety.

All this exposure contributes to dysregulation in the astronauts immune and endocrine systems.

So what does this mean for potentially longer space exploration missions and the humans embarking on those quests?

Although NASA believes there is no clinical risk to astronauts during orbital spaceflight, there is concern that during deep-space exploration missions there may be clinical risks related to viral shedding, lead study author Satish Mehta at Johnson Space Center told Florida Today via email.

The girl who wants to go to Mars

Alyssa Carson, 18 year old FIT student, has known she wanted to be an astronaut from a very young age and has been working towards that goal since childhood.

Malcolm Denemark, FLORIDA TODAY

Ultimately, the information gleaned from these space studies will shape the way we prepare for and design exploration-class missions, beyond the moon and Mars, where reactivation of latent viruses could result in increased risk for wide-ranging adverse medical events, according to the study.

Aside from the physical ramifications that living in space or other planets like Mars would cause on the human body, there's also a psychological toll that will affect those living far from Earth and their loved ones.

See the rest here:

Is colonizing Mars even a good idea? You can't breathe, after all

Human mission to Mars – Wikipedia

Proposed concepts

The idea of sending humans to Mars has been the subject of aerospace engineering and scientific studies since the late 1940s as part of the broader exploration of Mars. Some have also considered exploring the Martian moons of Phobos and Deimos.[1] Long-term proposals have included sending settlers and terraforming the planet. Proposals for human missions to Mars came from e.g. NASA, Russia, Boeing, and SpaceX. As of 2022, only robotic landers and rovers have been on Mars. The farthest humans have been beyond Earth is the Moon.

Conceptual proposals for missions that would involve human explorers started in the early 1950s, with planned missions typically being stated as taking place between 10 and 30 years from the time they are drafted.[2] The list of crewed Mars mission plans shows the various mission proposals that have been put forth by multiple organizations and space agencies in this field of space exploration. The plans for these crews have variedfrom scientific expeditions, in which a small group (between two and eight astronauts) would visit Mars for a period of a few weeks or more, to a continuous presence (e.g. through research stations, colonization, or other continuous habitation).[citation needed] By 2020, virtual visits to Mars, using haptic technologies, had also been proposed.[3]

Meanwhile, the unmanned exploration of Mars has been a goal of national space programs for decades, and was first achieved in 1965 with the Mariner 4 flyby. Human missions to Mars have been part of science fiction since the 1880s, and more broadly, in fiction, Mars is a frequent target of exploration and settlement in books, graphic novels, and films. The concept of a Martian as something living on Mars is part of the fiction.

The energy needed for transfer between planetary orbits, or delta-v, is lowest at intervals fixed by the synodic period. For EarthMars trips, the period is every 26 months (2 years, 2 months), so missions are typically planned to coincide with one of these launch periods. Due to the eccentricity of Mars's orbit, the energy needed in the low-energy periods varies on roughly a 15-year cycle[4] with the easiest periods needing only half the energy of the peaks.[5] In the 20th century, a minimum existed in the 1969 and 1971 launch periods and another low in 1986 and 1988, then the cycle repeated.[4] The next low-energy launch period occurs in 2033.[6]

Several types of mission plans have been proposed, including opposition class and conjunction class,[5] or the Crocco flyby.[7] The lowest energy transfer to Mars is a Hohmann transfer orbit, which would involve a roughly 9-month travel time from Earth to Mars, about 500 days (16mo) at Mars to wait for the transfer window to Earth, and a travel time of about 9 months to return to Earth.[8][9] This would be a 34-month trip.

Shorter Mars mission plans have round-trip flight times of 400 to 450 days,[10] or under 15 months, but would require significantly higher energy. A fast Mars mission of 245 days (8.0 months) round trip could be possible with on-orbit staging.[11] In 2014, ballistic capture was proposed, which may reduce fuel cost and provide more flexible launch windows compared to the Hohmann.[12]

In the Crocco grand tour, a crewed spacecraft would get a flyby of Mars and Venus in under a year in space.[13] Some flyby mission architectures can also be extended to include a style of Mars landing with a flyby excursion lander spacecraft.[14] Proposed by R. Titus in 1966, it involved a short-stay lander-ascent vehicle that would separate from a "parent" Earth-Mars transfer craft prior to its flyby of Mars. The Ascent-Descent lander would arrive sooner and either go into orbit around Mars or land, and, depending on the design, offer perhaps 1030 days before it needed to launch itself back to the main transfer vehicle.[14] (See also Mars flyby.)

In the 1980s, it was suggested that aerobraking at Mars could reduce the mass required for a human Mars mission lifting off from Earth by as much as half.[15] As a result, Mars missions have designed interplanetary spacecraft and landers capable of aerobraking.[15]

A number of unmanned spacecraft have landed on the surface of Mars, while some, such as the Schiaparelli EDM (2016), have failed what is considered a difficult landing. The Beagle2 failed in 2003. Among the successes:

When an expedition reaches Mars, braking is required to enter orbit. Two options are available: rockets or aerocapture. Aerocapture at Mars for human missions was studied in the 20th century.[16] In a review of 93 Mars studies, 24 used aerocapture for Mars or Earth return.[16] One of the considerations for using aerocapture on crewed missions is a limit on the maximum force experienced by the astronauts. The current scientific consensus is that 5 g, or five times Earth gravity, is the maximum allowable deceleration.[16]

Conducting a safe landing requires knowledge of the properties of the atmosphere, first observed by Mariner 4, and a survey of the planet to identify suitable landing sites. Major global surveys were conducted by Mariner 9 and Viking 1 and two orbiters, which supported the Viking landers. Later orbiters, such as Mars Global Surveyor, 2001 Mars Odyssey, Mars Express, and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, have mapped Mars in higher resolution with improved instruments. These later surveys have identified the probable locations of water, a critical resource.[17]

A primary limiting factor for sending humans to Mars is funding. In 2010, the estimated cost was roughly US$500 billion, though the actual costs are likely to be more.[18] Starting in the late 1950s, the early phase of space exploration was conducted as much to make a political statement as to make observations of the solar system. However, this proved to be both wasteful and unsustainable, and the current climate is one of international cooperation, with large projects such as the International Space Station and the proposed Lunar Gateway being built and launched by multiple countries.[citation needed]

Critics argue that the immediate benefits of establishing a human presence on Mars are outweighed by the immense cost, and that funds could be better redirected towards other programs, such as robotic exploration. Proponents of human space exploration contend that the symbolism of establishing a presence in space may garner public interest to join the cause and spark global cooperation. There are also claims that a long-term investment in space travel is necessary for humanity's survival.[18]

One factor reducing the funding needed to place a human presence on Mars may be space tourism. As the space tourism market grows and technological developments are made, the cost of sending humans to other planets will likely decrease accordingly. A similar concept can be examined in the history of personal computers: when computers were used only for scientific research, with minor use in big industry, they were big, rare, heavy, and costly. When the potential market increased and they started to become common in many homes (in Western and developed countries) for the purpose of entertainment such as computer games, and booking travel/leisure tickets, the computing power of home devices skyrocketed and prices plummeted.[19]

Several key physical challenges exist for human missions to Mars:[23]

Some of these issues were estimated statistically in the HUMEX study.[36]Ehlmann and others have reviewed political and economic concerns, as well as technological and biological feasibility aspects.[37] While fuel for roundtrip travel could be a challenge, methane and oxygen can be produced using Martian H2O (preferably as water ice instead of liquid water) and atmospheric CO2 with mature technology.[38]

Robotic spacecraft to Mars are currently required to be sterilized. The allowable limit is 300,000 spores on the exterior of general craft, with stricter requirements forspacecraft bound for "special regions" containing water.[39][40] Otherwise there is a risk of contaminating not only the life-detection experiments but possibly the planet itself.[41]

Sterilizing human missions to this level is impossible, as humans are host to typically a hundred trillion (1014) microorganisms of thousands of species of the human microbiota, and these cannot be removed. Containment seems the only option, but it is a major challenge in the event of a hard landing (i.e. crash).[42] There have been several planetary workshops on this issue, but with no final guidelines for a way forward yet.[43] Human explorers would also be vulnerable to back contamination to Earth if they become carriers of microorganisms.[44]

Over the past seven decades, a wide variety of mission architectures have been proposed or studied for human spaceflights to Mars. These have included chemical, nuclear, and electric propulsion, as well as a wide variety of landing, living, and return methodologies.

A number of nations and organizations have long-term intentions to send humans to Mars.

Significant technological hurdles need to be overcome for human spaceflight to Mars.

Entry into the thin and shallow Martian atmosphere will pose significant difficulties with re-entry; compared to Earth with much denser atmosphere, any spacecraft will descend very rapidly to the surface and must be slowed down.[53] A heat shield has to be utilized.[54] NASA is carrying out research on retropropulsive deceleration technologies to develop new approaches to Mars atmospheric entry. A key problem with propulsive techniques is handling the fluid flow problems and attitude control of the descent vehicle during the supersonic retropropulsion phase of the entry and deceleration.[55]

A return mission to Mars will need to land a rocket to carry crew off the surface. Launch requirements mean that this rocket would be significantly smaller than an Earth-to-orbit rocket. Mars-to-orbit launch can also be achieved in single stage. Despite this, landing an ascent rocket on Mars will be difficult. Re-entry for a large rocket will be difficult.[citation needed]

In 2014, NASA proposed the Mars Ecopoiesis Test Bed.[56]

One of the medical supplies that might be needed is a considerable mass of intravenous fluid, which is mainly water, but contains other substances so it can be added directly to the human blood stream. If it could be created on the spot from existing water, this would reduce mass requirements. A prototype for this capability was tested on the International Space Station in 2010.[57]

A person who is inactive for an extended period of time loses strength and muscle and bone mass. Spaceflight conditions are known to cause loss of bone mineral density in astronauts, increasing bone fracture risk. Last mathematical models predict 33% of astronauts will be at risk for osteoporosis during a human mission to Mars.[30] A resistive exercise device similar to ARED would be needed in the spaceship.

While humans can breathe pure oxygen, usually additional gases such as nitrogen are included in the breathing mix. One possibility is to take in situ nitrogen and argon from the atmosphere of Mars, but they are hard to separate from each other.[58] As a result, a Mars habitat may use 40% argon, 40% nitrogen, and 20% oxygen.[58]

An idea for keeping carbon dioxide out of the breathing air is to use reusable amine-bead carbon dioxide scrubbers.[59] While one carbon dioxide scrubber filters the astronaut's air, the other is vented to the Mars atmosphere.[59]

Some missions may be considered a "Mission to Mars" in their own right, or they may only be one step in a more in-depth program. An example of this is missions to Mars's moons, or flyby missions.

Many Mars mission concepts propose precursor missions to the moons of Mars, for example a sample return mission to the Mars moon Phobos[60] not quite Mars, but perhaps a convenient stepping stone to an eventual Martian surface mission. Lockheed Martin, as part of their "Stepping stones to Mars" project, called the "Red Rocks Project", proposed to explore Mars robotically from Deimos.[62][63]

Use of fuel produced from water resources on Phobos or Deimos has also been proposed.

An uncrewed Mars sample return mission (MSR) has sometimes been considered as a precursor to crewed missions to Mars's surface.[64] In 2008, the ESA called a sample return "essential" and said it could bridge the gap between robotic and human missions to Mars.[64] An example of a Mars sample return mission is Sample Collection for Investigation of Mars.[65] Mars sample return was the highest priority Flagship Mission proposed for NASA by the Planetary Decadal Survey 20132022: The Future of Planetary Science.[66] However, such missions have been hampered by complexity and expense, with one ESA proposal involving no less than five different uncrewed spacecraft.[67]

Sample return plans raise the concern, however remote, that an infectious agent could be brought to Earth.[67] Regardless, a basic set of guidelines for extraterrestrial sample return has been laid out depending on the source of sample (e.g. asteroid, Moon, Mars surface, etc.)[68]

At the dawn of the 21st century, NASA crafted four potential pathways to Mars human missions,[69] of which three included a Mars sample return as a prerequisite to human landing.[69]

The rover Perseverance, which landed on Mars in 2021, is equipped with a device that allows it to collect rock samples to be returned at a later date by another mission.[70] Perseverance as part of the Mars 2020 mission was launched on top of an Atlas V rocket on 30 July 2020.[71]

Starting in 2004, NASA scientists have proposed to explore Mars via telepresence from human astronauts in orbit.[72][73]

A similar idea was the proposed "Human Exploration using Real-time Robotic Operations" mission.[74][75]

The rest is here:

Human mission to Mars - Wikipedia

Nostradamus’ New Year 2023 Predictions: From Cannibalism On Earth And World War 3; Heres Some Shocking Claims Made By The French Astrologer – SpotboyE

Nostradamus' New Year 2023 Predictions: From Cannibalism On Earth And World War 3; Heres Some Shocking Claims Made By The French Astrologer  SpotboyE

Visit link:

Nostradamus' New Year 2023 Predictions: From Cannibalism On Earth And World War 3; Heres Some Shocking Claims Made By The French Astrologer - SpotboyE

Mars Colony Builder on Steam

https://store.steampowered.com/app/1440340/Cannon_Foundry_Simulator/Create futuristic cities, develop the infrastructure, make discoveries, explore and expand simply put, be the first one to build a settlement on the surface of Mars!

Have you ever thought of having a rover for a neighbor, red desert outside the window and Earth shining above you in the sky? Well, its high time you did! Welcome to the city of the future. We have a great public transport, efficient solar panels, fully automated homes and unlimited living space. Food is cheap, technology advanced, and people (along with robots) amiable. Mars town is a moonshot project (or should we say marshoot?) that will change the world!

The only thing left to do is to build it! And you have been chosen to start this process.

Develop the land and build roads, so that the city can expand further. You have an army of rovers and droids at your command, so youd better make good use of it! Erect the necessary buildings and then focus on what matters to you most technology, entertainment, terraforming, or discoveries? Enhance the quality of life on Mars and make everything in your power to make the city thrive.

There is a world beyond the domes of the town and nothing can stop you from exploring it! Hire people or program droids, and head out into the unknown! Fill in the blank spots on the maps travel across the land and find places that could be just right for erecting new cities. Remember about a supply chain, since you will need it to provide the outpost with food and resources.

To become self-sufficient, you need to gain resources. The simplest way to achieve that is to find a deposit and then start mining it this process requires a specialized team and a proper equipment. Make no mistake it only looks easy, but the most important part is to actually make it work. The Martian surface is extremely hostile for life, and you will need all the manpower that you can get.

Find a balance between stability and exploration. Acquire financial support to boost the colony, expand the settlement, and make people feel like at home under the great domes. But beware, no one knows what you may find during the process of the colonizationLets settle down and see what happens!

Read more here:

Mars Colony Builder on Steam

Celebrities Are Officially Being Sued by FTX Retail Investors

The first civil suit against the crypto exchange FTX was just filed, naming FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried, and 11 of FTX's many celebrity ambassadors.

Welp, that didn't take long. The first civil suit against the still-imploding crypto exchange FTX was just filed in a Florida court, accusing FTX, disgraced CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, and 11 of the exchange's many celebrity ambassadors of preying on "unsophisticated" retail investors.

The list of celeb defendants impressive — honestly, it reads more like an invite list to a posh award show than a lawsuit.

Geriatric quarterback Tom Brady and soon-to-be-ex-wife Gisele Bündchen lead the pack, followed by basketball players Steph Curry and Udonis Haslem, as well as the Golden State Warriors franchise; tennis star Naomi Osaka; baseballers Shoehi Ohtani, Udonis Haslem, and David Ortiz; and quarterback Trevor Laurence.

Also named is comedian Larry David — who starred in that FTX Super Bowl commercial that very specifically told investors that even if they didn't understand crypto, they should definitely invest — and investor Kevin O'Leary of "Shark Tank" fame.

"The Deceptive and failed FTX Platform," reads the suit," "was based upon false representations and deceptive conduct."

"Many incriminating FTX emails and texts... evidence how FTX’s fraudulent scheme was designed to take advantage of unsophisticated investors from across the country," it continues. "As a result, American consumers collectively sustained over $11 billion dollars in damages."

Indeed, a number of FTX promos embraced an attitude similar to the cursed Larry David commercial. In one, Steph Curry tells viewers that with FTX, there's no need to be an "expert," while a Naomi Osaka promotion pushed the idea that crypto trading should be "accessible," "easy," and "fun."

It's also worth noting that this isn't the first suit of its kind. Billionaire Mark Cuban, also of "Shark Tank" fame, was named in a class action lawsuit launched against the bankrupt lender Voyager in August, while reality TV star Kim Kardashian was recently made to pay a roughly $1.2 million fine for hawking the "EthereumMAX" token without disclosing that she was paid to do so.

The FTX suit, however, appears to be the most extensive — and high-profile — of its kind. And while a fine for a million or two is basically a one dollar bill to this tax bracket, $11 billion, even if split amongst a group of 11 exorbitantly wealthy celebs, is a more substantial chunk of change.

Of course, whether anyone actually ever has to pay up remains to be seen. Regardless, it's still a terrible look, and real people got hurt. If there's any defense here, though? At least they didn't promise to be experts.

READ MORE: FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried hit with class-action lawsuit that also names Brady, Bündchen, Shaq, Curry [Fox Business]

More on the FTX crash: Experts Say Sam Bankman-fried's Best Legal Defense Is to Say He's Just Really, Really Stupid

The post Celebrities Are Officially Being Sued by FTX Retail Investors appeared first on Futurism.

Read the rest here:

Celebrities Are Officially Being Sued by FTX Retail Investors

Sam Bankman-Fried Admits the "Ethics Stuff" Was "Mostly a Front"

In Twitter DMs, FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried appeared to admit that his

Effecting Change

The disgraced former head of the crypto exchange FTX, Sam Bankman-Fried, built his formidable public persona on the idea that he was a new type of ethical crypto exec. In particular, he was a vocal proponent of "effective altruism" — the vague-but-noble concept of using data to make philanthropic giving as targeted and helpful as possible.

But in a direct message, Vox's Kelsey Piper asked Bankman-Fried if the "ethics stuff" had been "mostly a front."

Bankman-Fried's reply: "Yeah."

"I mean that's not *all* of it," he wrote. "But it's a lot."

Truth Be Told

If the concept of becoming rich to save the world strikes you as iffy, you're not alone — and it appears that even Bankman-Fried himself knows it.

When Piper observed that Bankman-Fried had been "really good at talking about ethics" while actually playing a game, he responded that he "had to be" because he'd been engaged in "this dumb game we woke Westerners play where we say all the right shibboleths and everyone likes us."

Next time you're thinking of investing in crypto, maybe it's worth taking a moment to wonder whether the person running the next exchange might secretly be thinking the same thing.

More on effective altruism: Elon Musk Hired A Professional Gambler to Manage His Philanthropic Donations

The post Sam Bankman-Fried Admits the "Ethics Stuff" Was "Mostly a Front" appeared first on Futurism.

Link:

Sam Bankman-Fried Admits the "Ethics Stuff" Was "Mostly a Front"