The Mars Rover Made It!

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
121

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]Overcoming the issues of enabling live humans to arrive on Mars still breathing would be my guess for the next hurdle to overcome before colonization is even close to a reality. I have a feeling that whoever arrives in those early missions will have to agree to die there as well before going. I also have a feeling that despite some of Nasa personnel’s lack of enthusiasm for further moon missions that the moon will nonetheless be used as a lab for proving technology in that regard. Looooong way to go.

122

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]Overcoming the issues of enabling live humans to arrive on Mars still breathing would be my guess for the next hurdle to overcome before colonization is even close to a reality. I have a feeling that whoever arrives in those early missions will have to agree to die there as well before going. I also have a feeling that despite some of Nasa personnel’s lack of enthusiasm for further moon missions that the moon will nonetheless be used as a lab for proving technology in that regard. Looooong way to go.
[/quote]

I see moon mining in the distant future. Tons of useful resources. Space travel would have to become a lot less expensive to make it practical.

123

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]Overcoming the issues of enabling live humans to arrive on Mars still breathing would be my guess for the next hurdle to overcome before colonization is even close to a reality. I have a feeling that whoever arrives in those early missions will have to agree to die there as well before going. I also have a feeling that despite some of Nasa personnel’s lack of enthusiasm for further moon missions that the moon will nonetheless be used as a lab for proving technology in that regard. Looooong way to go.
[/quote]

I see moon mining in the distant future. Tons of useful resources. Space travel would have to become a lot less expensive to make it practical.[/quote]

If we found away to do controlled fusion with helium 3 we would fly tomorrow.

124

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]squating_bear wrote:

So if I get the reasoning - it’s to try and use the “tragedy of the commons” in a positive way by letting people research things that we can’t have an application for until we understand?[/quote]

Well, no, it isn’t the “tragedy of the commons” because it doesn’t involve over-exploitation of a commonly-owned resource that everyone has equal access to.

It’s using public funding (and private, too, sometimes) to invest in research that otherwise would not be done because the costs are too larger too indefinite in the short run to make economic sense for private investors.

The benefits of such research will likely be intergenerational (and profitable in the future).[/quote]
Hmmm…

‘over-exploitation’ is a relative term. Depends on who’s judging. I might get what you’re implying - in a true “tragedy of the commons” scenario, there isn’t any real room for doubt

‘public funding’ sounds like a commonly-owned resource to me.

‘equal access’ is arguable., depends on how you interpret that

I think the concept loosely fits. I’m not trying to pigeon-hole you into a weak position by using the term. I guess I come from a perspective where ‘public funding’ instantaneously shoots the term “tragedy of the commons” into my mind. I’m not even sure if that instinct is incorrect, but I should investigate a little more. Perhaps I’ve been throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The basic lesson I was taught from “tragedy of the commons” was that people don’t care as much about things that they do not own - or are not going to be held directly responsible for

That fits with the term ‘public’ anything, including ‘public funding’. That’s why I said using “tragedy of the commons” in a good way. Researchers can be a bit more open with money that isn’t theirs. Makes sense - that can help spur innovation. I’ve never thought of it quite like that. I’ve always focused on the dangers

125

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]Overcoming the issues of enabling live humans to arrive on Mars still breathing would be my guess for the next hurdle to overcome before colonization is even close to a reality. I have a feeling that whoever arrives in those early missions will have to agree to die there as well before going. I also have a feeling that despite some of Nasa personnel’s lack of enthusiasm for further moon missions that the moon will nonetheless be used as a lab for proving technology in that regard. Looooong way to go.
[/quote]

I see moon mining in the distant future. Tons of useful resources. Space travel would have to become a lot less expensive to make it practical.[/quote]

If we found away to do controlled fusion with helium 3 we would fly tomorrow. [/quote]

I’ve seen experiments trying to do cold fusion with lasers. Not sure If I’ll see the fruition of that in my lifetime.

126

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]Overcoming the issues of enabling live humans to arrive on Mars still breathing would be my guess for the next hurdle to overcome before colonization is even close to a reality. I have a feeling that whoever arrives in those early missions will have to agree to die there as well before going. I also have a feeling that despite some of Nasa personnel’s lack of enthusiasm for further moon missions that the moon will nonetheless be used as a lab for proving technology in that regard. Looooong way to go.
[/quote]

I see moon mining in the distant future. Tons of useful resources. Space travel would have to become a lot less expensive to make it practical.[/quote]

If we found away to do controlled fusion with helium 3 we would fly tomorrow. [/quote]

I’ve seen experiments trying to do cold fusion with lasers. Not sure If I’ll see the fruition of that in my lifetime.[/quote]

I think the only major problem they have is that they cannot pop the material in fast enough.

127

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]Overcoming the issues of enabling live humans to arrive on Mars still breathing would be my guess for the next hurdle to overcome before colonization is even close to a reality. I have a feeling that whoever arrives in those early missions will have to agree to die there as well before going. I also have a feeling that despite some of Nasa personnel’s lack of enthusiasm for further moon missions that the moon will nonetheless be used as a lab for proving technology in that regard. Looooong way to go.
[/quote]

I see moon mining in the distant future. Tons of useful resources. Space travel would have to become a lot less expensive to make it practical.[/quote]

If we found away to do controlled fusion with helium 3 we would fly tomorrow. [/quote]

I’ve seen experiments trying to do cold fusion with lasers. Not sure If I’ll see the fruition of that in my lifetime.[/quote]

Cold fusion is dead as a serious area of research, it has been since the late 80’s and will never be realized. The patent office will now rejects all patents for cold fusion and those entities that have patents do not bother to defend them. I will go into more detail later as to why it will never amount to more then science fiction later, when I am not posting from my phone.

128

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]Overcoming the issues of enabling live humans to arrive on Mars still breathing would be my guess for the next hurdle to overcome before colonization is even close to a reality. I have a feeling that whoever arrives in those early missions will have to agree to die there as well before going. I also have a feeling that despite some of Nasa personnel’s lack of enthusiasm for further moon missions that the moon will nonetheless be used as a lab for proving technology in that regard. Looooong way to go.
[/quote]

I see moon mining in the distant future. Tons of useful resources. Space travel would have to become a lot less expensive to make it practical.[/quote]

If we found away to do controlled fusion with helium 3 we would fly tomorrow. [/quote]

I’ve seen experiments trying to do cold fusion with lasers. Not sure If I’ll see the fruition of that in my lifetime.[/quote]

Cold fusion is dead as a serious area of research, it has been since the late 80’s and will never be realized. The patent office will now rejects all patents for cold fusion and those entities that have patents do not bother to defend them. I will go into more detail later as to why it will never amount to more then science fiction later, when I am not posting from my phone.[/quote]

What do you think the next big energy innovation will be? Like basically the next version of the industrial age?

129

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]Overcoming the issues of enabling live humans to arrive on Mars still breathing would be my guess for the next hurdle to overcome before colonization is even close to a reality. I have a feeling that whoever arrives in those early missions will have to agree to die there as well before going. I also have a feeling that despite some of Nasa personnel’s lack of enthusiasm for further moon missions that the moon will nonetheless be used as a lab for proving technology in that regard. Looooong way to go.
[/quote]

I see moon mining in the distant future. Tons of useful resources. Space travel would have to become a lot less expensive to make it practical.[/quote]

If we found away to do controlled fusion with helium 3 we would fly tomorrow. [/quote]

I’ve seen experiments trying to do cold fusion with lasers. Not sure If I’ll see the fruition of that in my lifetime.[/quote]

Cold fusion is dead as a serious area of research, it has been since the late 80’s and will never be realized. The patent office will now rejects all patents for cold fusion and those entities that have patents do not bother to defend them. I will go into more detail later as to why it will never amount to more then science fiction later, when I am not posting from my phone.[/quote]

What do you think the next big energy innovation will be? Like basically the next version of the industrial age?[/quote]
Magnetism

130

^

???

131

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
^

???[/quote] =]

132

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
^

???[/quote]
A post made in jest. I think the theoretical applications show promise though.

133

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
^

???[/quote]
A post made in jest. I think the theoretical applications show promise though.[/quote]
Also your avi complements that post perfectly lol

134

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]

If you need domes or something like that to protect people from excess solar radiation, then I really don’t see the point in making the atmosphere okay for life. It would seem to me to be more practical to just use what’s on Mars for the individual domes than doing that for the whole atmosphere.[/quote]

Terraform whole planet = more livable area?

135

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]

If you need domes or something like that to protect people from excess solar radiation, then I really don’t see the point in making the atmosphere okay for life. It would seem to me to be more practical to just use what’s on Mars for the individual domes than doing that for the whole atmosphere.[/quote]

Terraform whole planet = more livable area?[/quote]

Then were back to the lack of a magnetosphere problem and how to replicate that on a global scale.

136

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]

If you need domes or something like that to protect people from excess solar radiation, then I really don’t see the point in making the atmosphere okay for life. It would seem to me to be more practical to just use what’s on Mars for the individual domes than doing that for the whole atmosphere.[/quote]

Terraform whole planet = more livable area?[/quote]

Then were back to the lack of a magnetosphere problem and how to replicate that on a global scale.[/quote]

Magnets

137

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]

If you need domes or something like that to protect people from excess solar radiation, then I really don’t see the point in making the atmosphere okay for life. It would seem to me to be more practical to just use what’s on Mars for the individual domes than doing that for the whole atmosphere.[/quote]

Terraform whole planet = more livable area?[/quote]

Then were back to the lack of a magnetosphere problem and how to replicate that on a global scale.[/quote]

Magnets[/quote]

The earth is a giant electro-magnet. You have the outer core circling around the inner creating the magnetosphere. You’re talking about an enormous feat possibly even greater than creating an atmosphere on Mars.

138

Hey, DrMatt, if you come through this thread, I sent you a pm.

Edit: Hey DrMatt, a precambrian geologist with expertise in sedimentology and stratigraphy and geochemistry" at my university was able to get back to me, but I’d still be interested in your thoughts to my question.

139

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Hey, DrMatt, if you come through this thread, I sent you a pm.

Edit: Hey DrMatt, a precambrian geologist with expertise in sedimentology and stratigraphy and geochemistry" at my university was able to get back to me, but I’d still be interested in your thoughts to my question.[/quote]

I just checked my PMs and don’t have anything from you. You should send your question again, or you could post it here if you want.

140

It had to do with the accuracy radiometric dating of sediment layers between fossils, and the radioactive decay of certain isotopes. The professor at my university told me about how zircon is useful and that “…scientist date now 1.6 billion years old rocks with a precision of 100 000 years. Cool?”

Here’s the question I sent him:

[quote]I have a question regarding radiometric dating. My friend and I are
having a debate.
Anyway, she visited the Royal Tyrrell Museum b/c I told her that it
was a cool place to check out while she was in Alberta.
So the paleontologist there told her about radiometric dating, and
that scientists are unable to date the fossils, so they date the
sediment above and below where the fossil is found. Which makes sense.
But now I’m wondering, as is she, that if you’re dating the sediment,
how do you know when it began to decay? Where my understanding is, is
that the rock/minerals would begin decay after they have formed(not
when it settled but when the magma or lava cooled or however
rocks/minerals come to exist), but, IMO, that leaves the door open
that the rock/mineral could have come to exist well before the
dinosaur died.[/quote]

Thanks Dr.Matt