New York Post | Elon Musk shares plan to colonize Mars New York Post The text, which is a more technical summary and explanation of the Mars colonization plans that Musk revealed during a lengthy talk at the Astronautical Congress in Mexico late last year, explores the benefits and considerable challenges of creating a ... |
Continue reading here:
Artist's illustration of colonists on Mars. Scientists don't yet know how babies would develop and grow away from Earth, and this lack of knowledge poses a possible hurdle to establishing sustainable space settlements, experts say.
If humanity is serious about colonizing Mars, we need to get busy studying how to get busy in space.
We just don't know enough about how human reproduction and development work in the final frontier to confidently plan out permanent, sustainable settlements on the Red Planet or anywhere else away from Earth, said Kris Lehnhardt, an assistant professor in the department of emergency medicine at The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences.
"This is something that we, frankly, have never studied dramatically, because it's not been relevant to date," Lehnhardt said May 16 during a panel discussion at "On the Launchpad: Return to Deep Space," a webcast event in Washington, D.C., organized by The Atlantic magazine. [The Human Body in Space: 6 Weird Facts]
"But if we want to become a spacefaring species and we want to live in space permanently, this is a crucial issue that we have to address that just has not been fully studied yet," he added.
Off-Earth reproduction isn't a completely ignored topic, of course. Just last month, for example, a group of researchers in Japan announced that freeze-dried mouse sperm that was stored on the International Space Station for nine months gave rise to healthy pups.
Those results suggest that the relatively high levels of radiation experienced in space don't pose an insurmountable barrier to reproduction.
But the mouse sperm was brought back to Earth to produce embryos, which grew here on terra firma. How a human embryo would fare when away from Earth in the microgravity environment of orbit or deep space, or on Mars, whose surface gravity is just 38 percent as strong as that of our planet remains a mystery, Lehnhardt said.
"We have no idea how they're going to develop," he said. "Will they develop bones the way that we do? Will they ever be capable of coming to Earth and actually standing up?"
And there's a lot to think about beyond the nuts-and-bolts developmental issues. For example, people who are born and grow up on Mars, or in huge Earth-orbiting space habitats, "are going to be vastly different from what we are," Lehnhardt added. "And that may be kind of a turning point in human history."
The panel discussion also featured former NASA astronaut Michael Lpez-Alegra; Sheyna Gifford, a member of the HI-SEAS IV simulated Mars mission in Hawaii; and journalist Alison Stewart. You can watch the entire discussion on the AtlanticLIVE YouTube channel.
Follow Mike Wall on Twitter @michaeldwall and Google+. Follow us @Spacedotcom, Facebook or Google+. Originally published on Space.com.
Visit link:
Sex in Space: The Final Frontier for Mars Colonization? - Space.com
Shannon Nangle finished her PhD ready to take on a new challenge and set her sights on research to help makeMars colonization possible. But she isnt pursuing research on rocket fuels or space suits. Shes using synthetic biology to improve biomanufacturing of needed resources using simple inputs like sunlight,water, and CO2.
In 2015, a collaboration between Pam Silver and Daniel Noceras lab showed that the bacteriumRalstonia eutropha could be used along with water splitting to create biomass andfusel alcohols. Then in 2016 they followed up with bionic leaf 2.0 that useda more biocompatible catalyst to beat the efficiency of natural photosynthesis. Now, the technology has to beexpanded and scaled up to take on the many potential applications of an efficient solar to bioproduct technology.
To find out about the latest work to help move the bionic leaf out of the lab and maybe one day to Mars, I met with Shannon and graduate student Marika Ziesack, both members of Pam Silvers lab, in their Harvard Medical School lab space. I saw the benchtop setup for testingRalstonia eutrophawiththe biocompatible catalysts. A power source connects to the small electrodes that sit in the compartment with the bacteria. As the electricity is applied it splits waterwhich as H2O has two hydrogens and one oxygen atom into hydrogen and oxygen. The bacterium,Ralstonia eutropha in this case, can then use that hydrogen along with carbon dioxide to produce biomass like thebio-plastic precursor polymer polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB).
Ralstonia eutrophacan also be engineered to overproduce certain fatty acids and enzymes that allow for more biopolymers than just PHB. Thats one of the improvements that Shannon and Marika are working on so that biopolymers with different structural properties can be produced and used as biodegradable materials here on earth or as renewable building blocks on Mars.
Other engineering improvements can be made so the bacteria can tolerate stresses like high salt concentrations that can improve conductivity of the solution. They even mentioned the possibility of a bacterium that can grow in a mixture that includes urine waste to allowmore sustainable water recycling. Bacteria grown in a lab or production facility usually need a feedstock of biomass that can end up being the big cost in the bioplastic production. With sunlight, water, and air as inputs its possible to bypass the expensive feedstocks that would be normally be used to create these bioplastics.
To truly tackle applications like space exploration, synthetic biology will need to prove itself in the field. Others have noted that synthetic biology can be crucial to a Mars mission but first it has to get off of a lab bench. Thats why the team at Harvard areworking on more portable versions of the bionic leaf to hopefully show that it could work outside of the labusing only resources readily found on Earth or on Mars: solar power, water, and carbon dioxide.
Among the many challenges of Mars colonization would be the need to use resources found on Mars instead of bringing everything from Earth. This use of resources found in space is usually referred to as in situ resource utilization, and it would be necessary for long term space missions or colonization. There is a different set of resources out in space than on Earth, but in the last few years NASA has shown that water exists on Mars with frozen deposits reaching the amount of water in Lake Superior. Then if solar power can be used to split that water then hydrogen would be produced and you would just need CO2 to produce bioplastics. Fortunately, even though Mars atmosphere is 100 times less dense than on Earth, 96% of it is made up of CO2. So if a technology like synthetic biology can reliably turnwater and CO2 into useful materials would be ideal for conditions on Mars.
Then once engineered bacteria can convert the in situ resources into something useful like bioplastics, further processing can be done to make needed tools. With bioplastics that can mean 3D printing of products that are made in a renewable fashion with biodegradable materials. So even if this technology never makes it to Mars it may finds ways to replace some of the harsh chemical processes we currently use with biological processes.
Biology has already found a way to do many chemical processes extremely efficiently without high heat or harshchemicals often used in industrial processes. As researchers learn to harness the diverse biological pathways that already exist there will be more opportunities to engineer cells that can replace chemical reactors. More sophisticated models could even lead to predictions of exactly which pathway should be used to meet your final product needs. The possibility of taking advantage of so many capabilities that biology provides is what excites so manyover synthetic biology as a technology.
But for now,the bionic leaf and other promising synthetic biology tools will haveto prove how they can scale and perform in tough conditions outside of the lab. As they do that, synthetic biology researchers like Shannon will be moving us toward the big goals likemaking Mars colonization possible.
View original post here:
Elon Musk, the founder of SpaceX and Tesla, has made trips to Trump Tower. He met with Trump and the Washington Post has ben reliably told, discussed Mars and public-private partnerships.
Elon Musk and SpaceX have the bold dream of colonizing Mars, and think they can launch the first human mission to the surface of the Red Planet as soon as 2024 when Trump, if reelected, would still be in the White House. (We understand that Musk also talked with Trump about other issues, including the need for a smart grid the kind of infrastructure that would give a boost to the solar energy business, in which Musk is a leader via his investments in the company Solar City.)
Trump seems to be cozying up to Elon Musk and is entertaining the idea of financing Musks Mars colonization project
Elon's Vision of the Mars Colony
Initially, glass panes with carbon fiber frames to build geodesic domes on the surface, plus a lot of miner/tunneling droids. With the latter, you can build out a huge amount of pressurized space for industrial operations and leave the glass domes for green living space.
Real Mars and Spacex Plans
The current Mars plan is:
The Flight Tank for the Interstellar Transport was the most important part of the announcement
The flight tank will actually be slightly longer than the development tank shown, but the same diameter.
That was built with latest and greatest carbon fiber prepreg. In theory, it should hold cryogenic propellant without leaking and without a sealing linker. Early tests are promising.
Will take it up to 2/3 of burst pressure on an ocean barge in the coming weeks.
The spaceship would be limited to around 5 g's nominal, but able to take peak loads 2 to 3 times higher without breaking up.
Booster would be nominal of 20 and maybe 30 to 40 without breaking up.
Spacex and Elon Musk have the 61 page presentation of the Interplanetary Transport System and the plan from early exploration to a sustainable colony on Mars
Spacex has built a full sized carbon composite fuel tank.
The Interplanetary Transport system can launch 550 tons to low earth orbit which is nearly four times as much as the Saturn V. It would be over four times as powerful as the SLS in the final version of the SLS
Next version of Falcon 9 will have uprated thrust
Final Falcon 9 has a lot of minor refinements that collectively are important, but uprated thrust and improved legs are the most significant.
Elon thinks the F9 boosters could be used almost indefinitely, so long as there is scheduled maintenance and careful inspections. Falcon 9 Block 5 -- the final version in the series -- is the one that has the most performance and is designed for easy reuse, so it just makes sense to focus on that long term and retire the earlier versions. Block 5 starts production in about 3 months and initial flight is in 6 to 8 months, so there isn't much point in ground testing Block 3 or 4 much beyond a few reflights.
Robert Zubrin, Longtime Mars Colonization advocate, gives a Critique of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System.
Zubrin was struck by many good and powerful ideas in the Musk plan. However, Musks plan assembled some of those good ideas in an extremely suboptimal way, making the proposed system impractical. Still, with some corrections, a system using the core concepts Musk laid out could be made attractive not just as an imaginative concept for the colonization of Mars, but as a means of meeting the nearer-at-hand challenge of enabling human expeditions to the planet.
Zubrin explains the conceptual flaws of the new SpaceX plan, showing how they can be corrected to benefit, first, the near-term goal of initiating human exploration of the Red Planet, and then, with a cost-effective base-building and settlement program, the more distant goal of future Mars colonization.
Robert Zubrin, a New Atlantis contributing editor, is president of Pioneer Energy of Lakewood, Colorado, and president of the Mars Society.
Highlights * Have the second stage go only out to the distance of the moon and return to enable 5 payloads to be sent instead of one * Leave the 100 person capsule on Mars and only have a small cabin return to earth * use the refueling in orbit and other optimizations to enable a Falcon Heavy to deliver 40 tons to Mars instead of 12 for exploration missions in 2018, 2020 etc... * Reusable first stage makes rocketplanes going anywhere point to point on Earth feasible. Falcon Heavy would have the capacity of a Boeing 737 and could travel in about one hour of time anywhere
There are videos of the Elon Musk presentation and an interview with Zubrin about the Musk plan at the bottom of the article
Design of the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System
As described by Musk, the SpaceX ITS would consist of a very large two-stage fully-reusable launch system, powered by methane/oxygen chemical bipropellant. The suborbital first stage would have four times the takeoff thrust of a Saturn V (the huge rocket that sent the Apollo missions to the Moon). The second stage, which reaches orbit, would have the thrust of a single Saturn V. Together, the two stages could deliver a maximum payload of 550 tons to low Earth orbit (LEO), about four times the capacity of the Saturn V. (Note: All of the tons referenced in this article are metric tons.)
At the top of the rocket, the spaceship itself where some hundred passengers reside is inseparable from the second stage. (Contrast this with, for example, NASAs lunar missions, where each part of the system was discarded in turn until just the Command Module carried the Apollo astronauts back to Earth.) Since the second-stage-plus-spaceship will have used its fuel in getting to orbit, it would need to refuel in orbit, filling up with about 1,950 tons of propellant (which means that each launch carrying passengers would require four additional launches to deliver the necessary propellant). Once filled up, the spaceship can head to Mars.
The duration of the journey would of course depend on where Earth and Mars are in their orbits; the shortest one-way trip would be around 80 days, according to Musks presentation, and the longest would be around 150 days. (Musk stated that he thinks the architecture could be improved to reduce the trip to 60 or even 30 days.)
After landing on Mars and discharging its passengers, the ship would be refueled with methane/oxygen bipropellant made on the surface of Mars from Martian water and carbon dioxide, and then flown back to Earth orbit.
Zubrin's Problems with the Proposed Spacex System
The SpaceX plan as Musk described it contains nine notable features. If we examine each of these in turn, some of the strengths and weaknesses in the overall system will begin to present themselves.
1. Extremely large size. The proposed SpaceX launch system is four times bigger than a Saturn V rocket. This is a serious problem, because even with the companys impressively low development costs, SpaceX has no prospect of being able to afford the very large investment at least $10 billion required to develop a launch vehicle of this scale.
2. Use of methane/oxygen bipropellant for takeoff from Earth, trans-Mars injection, and direct return to Earth from the Martian surface. These ideas go together, and are very strong. Methane/oxygen is, after hydrogen/oxygen, the highest-performing practical propellant combination, and it is much more compact and storable than hydrogen/oxygen. It is very cheap, and is the easiest propellant to make on Mars. For over a quarter century, I have been a strong advocate of this design approach, making it a central feature of the Mars Direct mission architecture I first laid out in 1990 and described in my book The Case for Mars. However, it should be noted that while the manufacture of methane/oxygen from Martian carbon dioxide and water is certainly feasible, it is not without cost in effort, power, and capital facilities, and so the transportation system should be designed to keep this burden on the Mars base within manageable bounds.
3. The large scale manufacture of methane/oxygen bipropellant on the Martian surface from indigenous materials. Here I offer the same praise and the same note of caution as above. The use of in situ (that is, on-site) Martian resources makes the entire SpaceX plan possible, just as it is a central feature of my Mars Direct plan. But the scale of the entire mission architecture must be balanced with the production capacity that can realistically be established.
4. All flight systems are completely reusable. This is an important goal for minimizing costs, and SpaceX is already making substantial advances toward it by demonstrating the return and reuse of the first stage of its Falcon 9 launch vehicle. However, for a mission component to be considered reusable it doesnt necessarily need to be returned to Earth and launched again. In general, it can make more sense to find other ways to reuse components off Earth that are already in orbit or beyond. This idea is reflected in some parts of the new SpaceX plan such as refilling the second stage in low Earth orbit but, as we shall see, it is ignored elsewhere, at considerable cost to program effectiveness. Furthermore the rate at which systems can be reused must also be considered.
5. Refilling methane/oxygen propellant in the booster second stage in Earth orbit. Here Musk and his colleagues face a technical challenge, since transferring cryogenic fluids in zero gravity has never been done. The problem is that in zero gravity two-phase mixtures float around with gas and liquid mixed and scattered among each other, making it difficult to operate pumps, while the ultra-cold nature of cryogenic fluids precludes the use of flexible bladders to effect the fluid transfer. However, I believe this is a solvable problem and one well worth solving, both for the benefits it offers this mission architecture and for different designs we may see in the future.
6. Use of the second stage to fly all the way to the Martian surface and back. This is a very bad idea. For one thing, it entails sending a 7-million-pound-force thrust engine, which would weigh about 60 tons, and its large and massive accompanying tankage all the way from low Earth orbit to the surface of Mars, and then sending them back, at great cost to mission payload and at great burden to Mars base-propellant production facilities. Furthermore, it means that this very large and expensive piece of capital equipment can be used only once every four years (since the feasible windows for trips to and from Mars occur about every two years).
7. The sending of a large habitat on a roundtrip from Earth to Mars and back. This, too, is a very bad idea, because the habitat will get to be used only one way, once every four years. If we are building a Mars base or colonizing Mars, any large habitat sent to the planets surface should stay there so the colonists can use it for living quarters. Going to great expense to send a habitat to Mars only to return it to Earth empty makes no sense. Mars needs houses.
8. Quick trips to Mars. If we accept the optimistic estimates that Musk offered during his presentation, the SpaceX system would be capable of 115-day (average) one-way trips from Earth to Mars, a somewhat faster journey than other proposed mission architectures. But the speedier trips impose a great cost on payload capability. And they raise the price tag, thereby undermining the architectures professed purpose colonizing Mars since the primary requirement for colonization is to reduce cost sufficiently to make emigration affordable. Lets do some back-of-the-envelope calculations. Following the example of colonial America, lets pick as the affordability criterion the property liquidation of a middle-class household, or seven years pay for a working man (say about $300,000 in todays equivalent terms), a criterion with which Musk roughly concurs. Most middle-class householders would prefer to get to Mars in six months at the cost equivalent to one house instead of getting to Mars in four months at a cost equivalent to three houses. For immigrants, who will spend the rest of their lives on Mars, or even explorers who would spend 2.5 years on a round trip, the advantage of reaching Mars one-way in four months instead of six months is negligible and if shaving off two months would require a reduction in payload, meaning fewer provisions could be brought along, then the faster trip would be downright undesirable. Furthermore, the six-month transit is actually safer, because it is also the trajectory that loops back to Earth exactly two years after departure, so the Earth will be there to meet it. And trajectories involving faster flights to Mars will necessarily loop further out into space if the landing on Mars is aborted, and thus take longer than two years to get back to Earths orbit, making the free-return backup abort trajectory impossible. The claim that the SpaceX plan would be capable of 60-day (let alone 30-day) one-way transits to Mars is not credible.
9. The use of supersonic retropropulsion to achieve landing on Mars. This is a breakthrough concept for landing large payloads, one that SpaceX has demonstrated successfully in landing the first stages of its Falcon 9 on Earth. Its feasibility for Mars has thus been demonstrated in principle. It should be noted, however, that SpaceX is now proposing to scale up the landing propulsion system by about a factor of 50 and employing such a landing techniques adds to the propulsive requirement of the mission, making the (unnecessary) goal of quick trips even harder to achieve.
Improving the SpaceX ITS Plan
Taking the above points into consideration, some corrections for the flaws in the current ITS plan immediately suggest themselves:
A. Instead of hauling the massive second stage of the launch vehicle all the way to Mars, the spacecraft should separate from it just before Earth escape. In this case, instead of flying all the way to Mars and back over 2.5 years, the second stage would fly out only about as far as the Moon, and return to aerobrake into Earth orbit a week after departure. If the refilling process could be done expeditiously, say in a week, it might thus be possible to use the second stage five times every mission opportunity (assuming a launch window of about two months), instead of once every other mission opportunity. This would increase the net use of the second stage propulsion system by a factor of 10, allowing five payloads to be delivered to Mars every opportunity using only one such system, instead of the ten required by the ITS baseline design. Without the giant second stage, the spaceship would then perform the remaining propulsive maneuver to fly to and land on Mars.
B. Instead of sending the very large hundred-person habitat back to Earth after landing it on Mars, it would stay on Mars, where it could be repurposed as a Mars surface habitat something that the settlers would surely find extremely useful. Its modest propulsive stage could be repurposed as a surface-to-surface long-range flight system, or scrapped to provide material to meet other needs of the people living on Mars. If the propulsive system must be sent back to Earth, it should return with only a small cabin for the pilots and such colonists as want to call it quits. Such a procedure would greatly increase the payload capability of the ITS system while reducing its propellant-production burden on the Mars base.
C. As a result of not sending the very large second stage propulsion system to the Martian surface and not sending the large habitat back from the Martian surface, the total payload available to send one-way to Mars is greatly increased while the propellant production requirements on Mars would be greatly reduced.
D. The notion of sacrificing payload to achieve one-way average transit times substantially below six months should be abandoned. However, if the goal of quick trips is retained, then the corrections specified above would make it much more feasible, greatly increasing payload and decreasing trip time compared to what is possible with the original approach.
Changing the plan in the ways described above would greatly improve the performance of the ITS. This is because the ITS in its original form is not designed to achieve the mission of inexpensively sending colonists and payloads to Mars. Rather, it is designed to achieve the science-fiction vision of the giant interplanetary spaceship. This is a fundamental mistake, although the temptation is understandable. (A similar visionary impulse influenced the design of NASAs space shuttle, with significant disadvantage to its performance as an Earth-to-orbit payload delivery system.) The central requirement of human Mars missions is not to create or operate giant spaceships. Rather, it is to send payloads from Earth to Mars capable of supporting groups of people, and then to send back such payloads as are necessary.
To put it another way: The visionary goal might be to create spaceships, but the rational goal is to send payloads.
Alternative Versions of the SpaceX ITS Plan
To get a sense of some of the benefits that would come from making the changes I [Zubrin] outlined above, lets make some estimates. In the table below, I [Zubrin] compare six versions of the ITS plan, half based on the visionary form that Elon Musk sketched out (called the Original or O design in the table) and half incorporating the alterations I [Zubrin] have suggested (the Revised or R designs).
Our starting assumptions: The ship begins the mission in a circular low Earth orbit with an altitude of 350 kilometers and an associated orbital velocity of 7.7 kilometers per second (km/s). Escape velocity for such a ship would be 10.9 km/s, so applying a velocity change (DV) of 3 km/s would still keep it in a highly elliptical orbit bound to the Earth. Adding another 1.2 km/s would give its payload a perigee velocity of 12.1 km/s, sufficient to send it on a six-month trajectory to Mars, with a two-year free-return option to Earth. (In calculating trip times to Mars, we assume average mission opportunities. In practice some would reach Mars sooner, some later, depending on the launch year, but all would maintain the two-year free return.) We assume a further 1.3 km/s to be required for midcourse corrections and landing using supersonic retropropulsion. For direct return to Earth from the Martian surface, we assume a total velocity change of 6.6 km/s to be required. In all cases, an exhaust velocity of 3.74 km/s (that is, a specific impulse of 382 s) for the methane/oxygen propulsion, and a mass of 2 tons of habitat mass per passenger are assumed. A maximum booster second-stage tank capacity of 1,950 tons is assumed, in accordance with the design data in Musks presentation.
Using the improved plan to send 40 tons (3.3 times more) to Mars with Falcon Heavy
Consider what this revised version of the ITS plan would look like in practice, if it were used not for settling Mars but for the nearer-at-hand task of exploring Mars. If a SpaceX Falcon Heavy launch vehicle were used to send payloads directly from Earth, it could land only about 12 tons on Mars. (This is roughly what SpaceX is planning on doing in an unmanned Red Dragon mission as soon as 2018.) While it is possible to design a minimal manned Mars expedition around such a limited payload capability, such mission plans are suboptimal. But if instead, following the ITS concept, the upper stage of the Falcon Heavy booster were refueled in low Earth orbit, it could be used to land as much as 40 tons on Mars, which would suffice for an excellent human exploration mission. Thus, if booster second stages can be refilled in orbit, the size of the launch vehicle required for a small Mars exploration mission could be reduced by about a factor of three.
In all of the ITS variants discussed here, the entire flight hardware set would be fully reusable, enabling low-cost support of a permanent and growing Mars base. However, complete reusability is not a requirement for the initial exploration missions to Mars; it could be phased in as technological abilities improved. Furthermore, while the Falcon Heavy as currently designed uses kerosene/oxygen propulsion in all stages, not methane/oxygen, in the revised ITS plan laid out above only the propulsion system in the trans-Mars ship needs to be methane/oxygen, while both stages of the booster can use any sort of propellant. This makes the problem of refilling the second stage on orbit much simpler, because kerosene is not cryogenic, and thus can be transferred in zero gravity using flexible bladders, while liquid oxygen is paramagnetic, and so can be settled on the pumps side of the tank using magnets.
Dawn of the Spaceplanes
Toward the end of his presentation, Musk briefly suggested that one way to fund the development of the ITS might be to use it as a system for rapid, long-distance, point-to-point travel on Earth. This is actually a very exciting possibility, although I would add the qualifier that such a system would not be the ITS as described, but a scaled-down related system, one adapted to the terrestrial travel application.
For a rocketplane to travel halfway around the world would require a DV of about 7 km/s (6 km/s in physical velocity, and 1 km/s in liftoff gravity and drag losses). Assuming methane/oxygen propellant with an exhaust velocity of 3.4 km/s (it would be lower for a rocketplane than for a space vehicle, because exhaust velocity is reduced by surrounding air), such a vehicle, if designed as a single stage, would need to have a mass ratio of about 8, which means that only 12 percent of its takeoff mass could be solid material, accounting for all structures, while the rest would be propellant. On the other hand, if the rocketplane were boosted toward space by a reusable first stage that accomplished the first 3 km/s of the required DV, the flight vehicle would only need a mass ratio of about 3, allowing 34 percent of it to be structure. This reduction of the propellant-to-structure ratio from 7:1 down to 2:1 is the difference between a feasible system and an infeasible one.
In short, what Musk has done by making reusable first stages a reality is to make rocketplanes possible. But there is no need to wait for 500-ton-to-orbit transports. In fact, his Falcon 9 reusable first stage, which is already in operation, could enable globe-spanning rocketplanes with capacities comparable to the DC-3, while the planned Falcon Heavy (or New Glenn) launch vehicles could make possible rocketplanes with the capacity of a Boeing 737.
Nextbigfuture notes that reusable first stages are now technically functioning but safety and reliability would need to be improved by about 1000 to 10,000 times for point to point manned travel.
SOURCES- Spacex, Zubrin, the New Atlantis
More here:
Trump may fund the Spacex Mars Colonization plan - Next Big Future
Sol 0. 15
Sol 0 Mars Colonization. ( , ) ... ) -...
By: Ray Anor
Read the original post:
The Ricky Effect 2
Cause and effect take their toll as we follow Ricky toward his impending fate. Mars Colonization has gone awry, and the C.O.O.K.ening has yet to begin. You will never sleep after this... The...
By: Bryce Forgue
See the original post here:
Sol 0. 10 3D
Sol 0 Mars Colonization. ( , ) ... ) -...
By: Ray Anor
See the original post here:
Sol 0. 04
Sol 0 Mars Colonization. ( , ) ... ) -...
By: Ray Anor
See original here:
Let #39;s Play Sol 0-Mars Colonization #015 [Deutsch] - 3D Drucker
In dieser Folge kmmern wir uns um den 3D Drucker und Satelliten.
By: myNiKa Lets Plays
Originally posted here:
Let's Play Sol 0-Mars Colonization #015 [Deutsch] - 3D Drucker - Video
Sol 0. 03
Sol 0 Mars Colonization. ( , ) ... ) -...
By: Ray Anor
Go here to see the original:
Cities Skylines mods - Mars colonization
All mods available on Steam workshop My twitter https://twitter.com/Reeve3x Royalty Free Music by http://www.audiomicro.com/royalty-free-music.
By: Reeve x
Read the original post:
Mars Command to Mother Earth
A video made to inspire my Make-It Science students about Mars colonization. Original artwork/animation by Tyler Jacobson. "Cloud Code" original music by Aaron Michael Scott. Lyrics by Scott...
By: Scott Jacobson
Go here to read the rest:
Let #39;s Play Sol 0-Mars Colonization #014 [Deutsch] - Mehr Bewohner
In dieser Folge bekommen wir Nachwuchs auf dem Mars.
By: myNiKa Lets Plays
The rest is here:
Let's Play Sol 0-Mars Colonization #014 [Deutsch] - Mehr Bewohner - Video
By Mike Wall
This 1999 Hubble telescope image shows Mars when Mars was 54 million miles from Earth.(REUTERS/NASA/Handout)
One hundred people are still in the running to become humanity's first Mars explorers.
The Netherlands-based nonprofit Mars One, which aims to land four pioneers on the Red Planet in 2025 as the vanguard of a permanent colony, has whittled its pool of astronaut candidates down to 100, organization representatives announced Monday Feb. 16.
More than 202,000 people applied to become Red Planet explorers after Mars One opened the selection process in April 2013. The latest cut came after Mars One medical director Norbert Kraft interviewed the 660 candidates who had survived several previous rounds of culling. [Images of Mars One's Red Planet Colony Project]
"The large cut in candidates is an important step towards finding out who has the right stuff to go to Mars," Mars One co-founder and CEO Bas Lansdorp said in a statement. "These aspiring Martians provide the world with a glimpse into who the modern day explorers will be."
The remaining pool consists of 50 men and 50 women who range in age from 19 to 60, Mars One representatives said. Thirty-nine come from the Americas (including 33 from the United States), 31 from Europe, 16 from Asia, seven from Africa and seven from Australia.
The remaining candidates will next participate in group challenges, to demonstrate their ability and willingness to deal with the rigors of Mars life. After another round of cuts, the finalists will be divided into four-person teams, which will train in a simulated Red Planet outpost.
Eventually, Mars One intends to select 24 astronauts (six four-person teams), who will become full-time employees of the organization and prepare for the Mars colonization mission.
"Being one of the best individual candidates does not automatically make you the greatest team player, so I look forward to seeing how the candidates progress and work together in the upcoming challenges," Kraft said.
Read the original here:
Private Mars One colony project cuts applicant pool to 100 volunteers
Mars Colonization(Sol 0) #1
MarsColonization(Sol 0). . ...
By: Mr. Epic
Continue reading here:
Let #39;s Play Sol 0-Mars Colonization #013 [Deutsch] - Das schwarze Loch
In dieser Folge versuchen wir das schwarze Loch zu stopfen 🙂
By: myNiKa Lets Plays
See more here:
Let's Play Sol 0-Mars Colonization #013 [Deutsch] - Das schwarze Loch - Video
Let #39;s Play Sol 0-Mars Colonization #012 [Deutsch] - Energie
In dieser Folge kmmern wir uns um die Energie und um das Problem das laufend unsere Gebude kaputt gehen.
By: myNiKa Lets Plays
View original post here:
Let's Play Sol 0-Mars Colonization #012 [Deutsch] - Energie - Video
Let #39;s Play Sol 0-Mars Colonization #010 [Deutsch] - Wasser,Wasser, Wasser
In dieser Folge geht es primr darum das Wasserproblem zu lsen. Ob wir es endlich hinbekommen? Weitere Folgen und Infos auf http://www.mynika.de.
By: myNiKa Lets Plays
The rest is here:
Let's Play Sol 0-Mars Colonization #010 [Deutsch] - Wasser,Wasser, Wasser - Video
Let #39;s Play Sol 0-Mars Colonization #011 [Deutsch] - weiter geht #39;s
In dieser Folge wird weiter fleiig gebaut um die Basis aufzuwerten,
By: myNiKa Lets Plays
See original here:
Let's Play Sol 0-Mars Colonization #011 [Deutsch] - weiter geht's - Video