New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: This forum is accepting new registrations by emailing newmarsmember * gmail.com become a registered member. Read the Recruiting expertise for NewMars Forum topic in Meta New Mars for other information for this process.

#1 Re: Not So Free Chat » Philosophers on Mars? - Who would you "take"? » 2002-05-31 10:44:18

If you're both an Enlightenment scholar and a Mars enthusiast, Cindy, I'd recommend
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ … 5-6435017]The Demon-Haunted World by Carl Sagan.

(The link is to the Amazon.com description.)  Although it's a bit out of balance and uncharacteristically closed-minded coming from such a great scholar (I'd love to have seen him debate religion with Polkinghorn and Hawking big_smile ), it's a fairly clear look into what the Enlightenment mindset had evolved into by the late 20th century.

Visited by moderator 2022/01/30

#2 Re: Not So Free Chat » Philosophers on Mars? - Who would you "take"? » 2002-05-31 05:27:04

Hi Cindy!  Great topic!

I hope this doesn't start an argument (yeah, right! big_smile ), but I'd take the Christian Bible with me.  Though not technically a work of philosophy, the principles for interpersonal relationships set forth in the New Testament teachings of Jesus in particular could have an incredible impact on an infant society.

I'd probably add to that the work of Karl Barth, John Warwick Montgomery, and (believe it or not) Nietzsche.  I'm a study in contrasts. tongue

[Edit:  I almost forgot S?ren Kierkegaard!]

#3 Re: Not So Free Chat » Your Favorite Sci-Fi Author? - ...or am I making a bad assumption here? » 2002-05-27 09:41:15

All classics, Christina...I've always been fond of The Number of the Beast, but Starship Troopers takes the prize as my favorite Heinlein.  Chalk it up to testosterone, I suppose.

Which Asimov is your favorite?  I love the Foundation Series -- at least the ones Asimov wrote himself...

#4 Re: Not So Free Chat » Your Favorite Sci-Fi Author? - ...or am I making a bad assumption here? » 2002-05-25 11:14:20

Nope, I've read it as well. It's one of the best realistic hard-SF novels about Mars out there, although it's not really about Mars rather than getting there.

Well, as you might imagine from the quote in my signature, I'm partial to those kinds of stories. big_smile

I met him once at a talk we were both speaking at in London - he was a very nice guy. I bought a copy of Voyage there to get it signed by him smile

Okay, I am now officially jealous.  Did you ask him to write a sequel? wink

#5 Re: Not So Free Chat » Your Favorite Sci-Fi Author? - ...or am I making a bad assumption here? » 2002-05-24 06:18:43

Am I really the only one here who's read Baxter's Voyage?  If you're a Mars advocate, you really should read it...  Here's a link to the appropriate page at Amazon.co.uk, and another to the page at Amazon.com, which has a fuller review and more reader comments.

Imagine The Right Stuff (and if you haven't read that, you can't really call yourself a space enthusiast!) in an alternate world where Kennedy survives the assassination attempt to motivate the U.S. to go to Mars.  It's within the top three books I've ever read...

#6 Re: Pictures of Mars » Favorite Sci-Fi Movie? - Blade Runner for me. . . » 2002-05-22 08:16:17

^^^  What excellent taste you obviously have, Bill... big_smile

This is a very tough choice.  Probably The Matrix.  I know, that doesn't make me very noteworthy.  Oh well.  It's the truth.

On top of that, I'm a huge fan of anything Star Trek...but I suppose that doesn't make me exactly unique around here either, does it?

#7 Re: Not So Free Chat » Your Favorite Sci-Fi Author? - ...or am I making a bad assumption here? » 2002-05-22 08:10:40

Any Stephen Baxter fans out there?  I'd think that Voyage would be a Mars Society favorite.

#8 Re: Civilization and Culture » The Martian Dead - What's to become of them? » 2002-05-22 08:01:44

clark, thanks for taking the time to post such a detailed reply.  If you'll forgive me, I'm not going to respond.  Aside from the fact that you've given me a great deal to think about, I'm feeling more than a little over my head in all this. smile I'll just say this:  now that I have a clearer understanding of your position, I have a great deal of respect for your intellect.

Again, thanks...

#9 Re: Civilization and Culture » The Martian Dead - What's to become of them? » 2002-05-21 12:02:34

Sorry, clark, I posted a quickie as a placeholder and then added to it.  I'll wait to reply to your above post until you (and others, perhaps?) have had time to digest everything I wrote. smile

#10 Re: Civilization and Culture » The Martian Dead - What's to become of them? » 2002-05-21 10:33:42

Religious convictions aside, maintaining the long term survival of any society is the end all be all of the discussion.

Interestingly enough, history is full of stories of communities that put their religious convictions above community survival.  Some would say that humanity as a whole is better for their convictions.

If, as you contend, that religion "always seems" to trump reason, why is their progress? After all, religion is merely a system of belief that is supposed to bring order to a disordered universe- a common human trait.

Though I disdain being perceived as overly technical, I'd argue that religion is "belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe, or a personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship."  Of course, I'd have the dubious distinction of having the dictionary on my side.  Thus religion itself is not "supposed to bring order to a disordered universe," as you postulate, but rather the acknowledgement that someone/thing already has.  I hope you can understand why such an understanding of the cosmos would drive an individual, community, or society to choose adherence to their religious convictions over survival.

Rather than answer the question you posed in the above quote, I prefer to point out the unconscious assumption you made in posing it:  that religious thought cannot lead produce "progress" (a frighteningly subjective term in a discussion such as this one, but you chose it, so I'll use it).  Personally, I don't find your assumption offensive, though many would.  I'll merely point out here that no serious historian -- or sociologist, for that matter -- would agree with that assumption.  Perhaps you'd like to rephrase the question?

While religion has been used as a means to coordinate groups, it is by no means an uncontrollable beast that dictates human action.

Here again I would have to disagree.  While I question your motivation in characterizing religion as a "beast," I would put forth that it is, at least in societal terms, uncontrollable.  Check with the Nazis, Soviets, Sandinistas, or Chinese Communists if you're unsure about this one.  Because of the unique nature of religious thought, it defies all attempts to eradicate or subjugate it.  (Please try to keep in mind that I'm not talking about any one form of religious thought or philosophy here; rather, I'm pointing out the character of religious philosophy as a system of thought.)  An understanding of this fact often leads those who would "control" religion to a third option:  adulterate it.  However, watering down a system of religious thought tends to strengthen the faith of the "orthodox," ensuring that their doctrine continues to propogate.  Of course, I'm overgeneralizing almost to the point of foolishness here, but as St. Paul said, "you drove me to it." wink

Again, if religion is the "trump card" (as it were), how should we account for the western civilization moving beyond the limits of Church teachings? How do we explain technical and scientific evidence that only serves to discredit certain religions in of themselves? Wouldn't religion prevent such happenenings?

Again, your unspoken assumption rears it's intellectually disreputable head.  Many would argue that western civilization hasn't "moved beyond the limits of Church teachings."  In fact, a quick perusal of the New Testament, the Pentateuch, or the Qur'an would all indicate that western civilization has a long way to go, at least from a societal standpoint.  To quote Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:

It seems to me that [western society's] moral progress lags behind your scientific progress...You have allowed the material means by which you live to outdistance the spiritual ends for which you live.  You have allowed your mentality to outrun your morality.  You have allowed your civilization to outdistance your culture.  Through your scientific genius you have made the world a neighborhood, but through your moral and spiritual genius you have failed to make of it a brotherhood...I would urge you to keep your moral advances abreast of your scientific advances.

As for explaining "technical and scientific evidence that only serves to discredit certain religions in of themselves," I will only say that Galileo, Ptolomy, Newton, and Einstein were all religious men.  The implications of that fact are yours to do with as you please.

I have no doubt that humans will take religion with them, where ever they go, just like they will take germs, pests, hate, lust, want, altruism, and joy. However, religion, like the rest of the examples is a human condition that is ultimetly a product of being human- as a human condition, it falls into the sphere of our control.

In keeping with my tradition, my intellectual integrity, and my conscience, I would have to disagree once more.  While the individual may have complete control over his own choice of religion (and many would argue with even that hypothesis), society as a whole can no more control religious thought -- and, I dare say, expression -- than it can the weather.

To prove (or at least strengthen) my point, I challenge you to point to one society in all of human history that has managed to eradicate, subjugate, or adulterate all religious thought that it deemed to be contrary to its own best interest, and survived to tell the tale.

#11 Re: Not So Free Chat » Your Favorite Sci-Fi Author? - ...or am I making a bad assumption here? » 2002-05-21 10:24:29

^^^  You know, there was a reason I used the singular and not the plural, Adrian... wink Just kidding.  I've been wanting to read some Vinge for a while now; he made quite a splash a few years back.

Allen Steele is also a favorite of mine...particularly his older stuff.

I expect to see a great deal of KSR in this thread...I enjoy him too...although I have to say I prefer Bova's Mars to KSR's.  I know, I'm a heretic.  So excommunicate me. big_smile

Anyone else?

#12 Re: Life support systems » Power generation on Mars » 2002-05-21 06:39:24

I'm a staunch proponent of nuclear fission on Earth (I was a nuclear engineering minor), so as you might imagine I have no problem using a fission reactor to power a Mars settlement.  However, I forsee it being a hard sell for earthbound mission planners who have to deal with Earth's political agendas, petty provincialisms, and media-fueled ignorance.

What about constructing solar arrays in Martian orbit and beaming the power down to a settlement via microwaves?  I've not done any significant study of the concept, but I know it has been advocated as an alternative energy source for this planet...and with the Martian atmosphere so much thinner than Earth's, I would imagine the efficiencies would be significantly higher there.

#13 Re: Not So Free Chat » Your Favorite Sci-Fi Author? - ...or am I making a bad assumption here? » 2002-05-21 06:24:32

The assumption here is that most Mars advocates are also going to be sci-fi readers/watchers.  Feel free to attack it at will...

...or, if you prefer, share who your favorite sci-fi author is, and perhaps your favorite work by that author. smile

#14 Re: Civilization and Culture » The Martian Dead - What's to become of them? » 2002-05-21 06:11:40

To quote Shakespeare, clarke, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio/Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." big_smile

For better or worse, right or wrong, religion always seems to trump reason.  Unless this is a local effect caused by some undiscovered element in Earth's atmosphere, I have no doubt we will take this truth to Mars with us. wink

#15 Re: Human missions » Human Orbital Missions - Send them to orbit to control robots » 2002-05-14 08:38:10

Hello and welcome, Bryan!

David S. F. Portree's Romance to Reality site has probably the most complete collection on the Internet of past and present studies and plans for missions to the Moon and Mars.  If I remember correctly, it includes several baseline studies by NASA and the major contractors of missions like you detail above.  Unfortunately, there is no search function on the site, but it's so interesting that I'm sure you won't mind "thumbing through" the pages looking for what you want. wink

That being said, my only comment on your idea is this:  It's impossible to deny the advantages such a mission would have, but it would also be a shame to go that far without putting a few bootprints in the regolith... ??? However...I can certainly understand why an Apollo 10 has to come before an Apollo 11. big_smile

#16 Re: Civilization and Culture » The Martian Dead - What's to become of them? » 2002-05-13 11:30:12

There are some very interesting religious offshoots to your question, Phobos, given that an early colony is likely to be made up of people of many different faiths, each with its own rituals and beliefs regarding death.  In the harsh environment of a Martian base or colony, would those beliefs be subordinated to basic survival, a la the floating colony in Waterworld?

#17 Re: Human missions » Space Command - Space Command » 2002-05-13 11:12:33

...I don't recall ever saying that it was "alien construction" on Mars.  It does not seem like a phrase I would use.  You see, I do not believe in aliens.  According to surveys of the American public, I am in the minority.  I believe accepting "aliens" is part of the long-term conditioning we have been put through for roughly the past 50 years.

I'd be very interested to hear more on this idea, GOM, as well as your theories about the origin of the Face and other "anomolies" on Mars.

I hope my earlier posts didn't put you off at all...I don't tend toward sarcasm and I like to think I have a fairly sympathetic ear for most "conspiracy theorists."  (If there's another term you'd find less offensive, by the way, please let me know.)  After all, I've built my life around the idea that over 2000 years ago, a man rose from the dead, and the "Powers That Be" have been trying to hide the Truth from the masses ever since. big_smile

Incidentally, I'm also completely willing to accept that the Face is of intelligent origin...

#18 Re: Human missions » Mars Mission. Step 1 » 2002-05-13 10:59:57

Hi Peter! ... You make a comment about the discovery of life making a difference to colonisation plans but you do not specify what kind of life; entirely indigenous and alien life or just familiar Earth-type life. Which do you mean? Also, if it's just Earth-type bacteria and moulds, how would you envisage that changing the colonisation plans, if at all?

Shawn, thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify my position a little.

From my perspective, any extant life that is found to have existed on Mars prior to humanity's arrival is indigenous for all intents and purposes.  I'll confess I'm a bit confused by your reference to "earth-type" life.  Unless it could be proven that a lifeform was brought to Mars by one of our landed probes (a very difficult proposition, I would assume), then we would be forced to conclude that it was Martian in origin regardless of how much it resembled some previously known Earth organism.

If such an organism is found -- life on any order -- then there are serious ethical questions to be considered before proceding with a colonization program, or any permanent presence, for that matter.  It's simply a matter of precedence.  Once humanity chooses to exercise dominion over single-celled life on Mars, it becomes that much easier to exercise it over higher-order life we find on other worlds (because, for example, they destroy Earth native crops or livestock used to provide food for a fledgling colony).  The logical extension of this kind of a galactic "manifest destiny" is to confine, relocate, or exterminate "semi-intelligent" or intelligent lifeforms who get in the way of human progress.

This may sound far-fetched, but from a legal standpoint it's just a hop, skip, and a jump from colonizing Mars without regard for the bacteria that were there first to forcing Centaurians onto "reservations" so that we can plant Earth crops on their land.  What we need are some firm guidelines before we determine whether Mars has life or not -- a "Prime Directive," if you will...

...or have I been watching too much Star Trek again? big_smile

#19 Re: Civilization and Culture » Crew Composition - Okay, OTHER than you, who should go? » 2002-05-12 09:56:31

-- How many crew?

"5 or 6 - - I have mixed feelings about the even/odd debate and can go either way"

I would agree, for mostly logistical reasons.  Of course, you said below that the crew should be a 50/50 gender mix, so that basically solves the "even-odd" problem for you. big_smile

-- How important is it that they have previous spaceflight experience?

"IMHO - everyone should serve at least 1 tour on the ISS, which can be done after making the "A" list. Perhaps the final crew could serve a full ISS rotation by themselves to help gel team cohesiveness. Space experience before final selection is less critical, again, IMHO."

Again, I agree with everything you said here.  Possible exceptions might be the mission commander (I'm thinking that a space veteran would be the best choice) and the Mars lander pilot (someone with spaceflight experience would be a major "plus" here).

-- What scientific disciplines should be represented?

"First, various specialities in geology and microbiology, especially anaerobic bacteria. I would like to see agricultural specialists who can attempt to build greenhouses and formulate hydroponic solution from regolith. Possibly a materials engineer to experiment with brick making and the processing of Martian materials and atmosphere into useful resources. Everyone should have a solid background in chemistry, even if done by correspondence on the way to Mars!"

Again I agree, but I have a question:  Why the emphasis on chemistry?  I would think geology expertise would have a more positive impact on mission effectiveness.

-- Should an attempt be made to represent nationalities/races/ethnicities evenly?

"Too many variables for me to give an opinion - I could write a book and still remain confused."

-- What about religion, for that matter?

"Ditto."

IMO, these kinds of factors -- which have no impact on a person's ability to perform his job -- should not be an issue in crew selection.  However, my pragmatic side tells me that the jaded politicos and money-grubbing lawyers will make a major issue out of at least one, if not all, of these things.

-- Should any portion of the crew should be military?

"YES - probably several experienced officers with active duty experience. An ability to work as a team within a command structure would seem essential. See below. . ."

Again, I agree...but let me ask you this.  For the reasons you specified, would you advocate the entire crew come from military backgrounds, as they did for the majority of the lunar flights?  Remember, our scenario deals only with the first, and presumably most dangerous and critical, mission of the program.

Thanks for your thoughtful response, Bill.  I'm eager to hear more of your thoughts.

#20 Re: Civilization and Culture » Crime and Insanity - What to do about it. » 2002-05-11 12:33:50

I think having a trained psychologist, with expertise in counseling and non-drug therapy, would go a long way toward fulfilling that "design requirement." smile

#21 Re: Civilization and Culture » Crime and Insanity - What to do about it. » 2002-05-11 10:24:13

That's not exactly what I was trying to say, Adrian...my point was because it is impossible to ensure that a mental destabilization will not occur, mission planners would have to at least consider it and write contingency plans to account for it.

I'm not so sure that execution (I wish there was some better word...) would be ruled out by mission planners out of hand.  It warrants serious consideration.  Do you have any idea how massive nine months worth of valium is...or how much storage space it requires?  Given the mass/space restrictions on any of the more feasible mission architectures we discuss here on a regular basis, it seems unlikely that mission planners would choose to haul that volume of drugs to Mars and back unless there was sufficiently high probability of it being needed.

As I stated above, I don't like any of the solutions that have been posed here, for a combination of logistical and ethical reasons.  There must be some solution we're overlooking.  I'm hoping a few others will weigh in on the issue.  (Hint hint!  big_smile )

#22 Re: Civilization and Culture » Crime and Insanity - What to do about it. » 2002-05-11 05:18:40

Regarding your first thought, Phobos, the "destabilizing" of a crewmember is an important concern that mission planners would have to prepare for.  (Kim Stanley Robinson and Ben Bova have both had literary field days with the possibility!)  Hopefully, careful crew selection and training would reduce the probability of such an occurance to nearly nil, but what if the "impossible" happened?  Just off the top of my head, here are a few options:

-- Incarcerate the ill crewmember in his stateroom or in some empty storage area.

-- Sedate the ill crewmember for the duration of the mission.

In either of these cases, some mission objectives could still be achieved, although significant mission resources would be required to care for the ill crewmember and guard against any danger he might cause to himself or the mission.  Dependent upon the specifics of the situation, mission planners might deem it wise to abort the mission entirely and simply return to Earth.  If a crewmember became a danger to himself or others, I think this is the safest alternative...barring one:

-- The ill crewmember could be executed.  As harsh as it sounds, such a step might appear necessary to ensure the safety of the crew and the mission.  However, the phychological load that such an execution would place on the remaining crewmembers would likely be so high as to affect their efficiency or even their mental health and stability.  Such an option in the relationally tight dynamic of a small (less than 12) crew could have devistating effects.

None of these options are "pretty," and all would severly limit the amount of useful work a mission could accomplish -- in fact, such a radical destabilization would more than likely force the aborting of the mission.  Any other ideas out there?

#23 Re: Civilization and Culture » Crew Composition - Okay, OTHER than you, who should go? » 2002-05-11 04:27:25

All good questions, Bill, and all of which will impact crew composition.

For the sake of argument, let's assume that this first mission is part of an open-ended program to construct a small, continuously manned scientific outpost on the Martian surface.  The primary goal of the program is to determine to within a reasonable level of certainty if Mars currently supports or has at any time in the past supported life.  Secondary to this is the goal of research into and "field testing" of technologies that will allow a "colonization" of Mars (or other bodies) at some point in the mid- to far-term future, should no indiginous life be discovered.  This first mission will establish a "beachhead" on Mars by delivering the initial infrastructure of the outpost, and will begin the primary and secondary research programs.  It is important to note that none of the first crew will be left on the Martian surface when this first mission is complete; sufficient infrastructure to support continuous manning will not be delivered until the second mission.

A large percentage -- roughly two thirds -- of the funding for our mission is provided by national governments.  The other third is split evenly between private industry and an international consortium of private universities and research institutions.  As mission planners, we have a moral duty to eschew any and all political agendas and come up with crew composition guidelines that provide the highest probability of mission success.  We'll leave it to the jaded politicos to hack up our work for the sake of their various agendas later. wink

Thanks for pointing out my ambiguities, guys...does this give you enough information to work with?

#24 Re: Human missions » Space Command - Space Command » 2002-05-11 03:57:53

Hi Christina!

I'd remind you that the above photo is from a source that GOM would undoubtedly believe to be on the "inside" of the conspiracy...so, as evidence, it is basically unusable, and any conclusions drawn from it are suspect at best. wink

Someone remind me never to discuss religion on this BBS... big_smile

#25 Re: Meta New Mars » Mars Haiku competition! » 2002-05-11 01:40:05

This is great!  Excellent work, all who participated!

There's an interview with Benford coming up?  Woo hoo! big_smile  big_smile  big_smile

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB