Elon Musk says SpaceX's new spaceship could go 'well beyond Mars'

It's interesting how little science is being discussed in this thread.

The Earth is the earth because it has a particular SIZE that allows a liquid core to generate a magnetic field so that the chemical reactions occurring at the interface of the geosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, can occur without being torn apart by the Suns UV radiation.

We also have a moon that further stimulates the ocean into activity. Without the moon, the tides wouldn't exist; and without the tides, life wouldn't have begun.

We also have the planet Jupiter to protect the Earth from asteroids, which allows life to evolve on it without it becoming destroyed by intermittent asteroids bombardments.

Mars does not have criteria number one, that is, it does not have a mantle that generates an electromagnetic layer to protect autocatalytic feedbacks from being destroyed by UV waves. Its atmosphere would also be thrown by the 2nd law of thermodynamics into disarray because of the charging effects of UV radiation. It would thus always be losing atmosphere.

Mars is simply inhospitable to life. At the very most, you could build a dome on the planet like in Total Recall. You couldn't actually terraform it without constantly renewing its atmosphere - and where you would get the resources to do that.

a reply to: Astrocyte

We also have a moon that further stimulates the ocean into activity. Without the moon, the tides wouldn't exist; and without the tides, life wouldn't have begun.

On the first point you are wrong, the gravity gradient of the Sun would produce tides. Less than half, but still tides.
On the second point you are making a broad assumption.

Its atmosphere would also be thrown by the 2nd law of thermodynamics into disarray because of the charging effects of UV radiation. It would thus always be losing atmosphere.

Venus has no magnetic field yet it has a dense atmosphere. The reason Mars lost its atmosphere is twofold; no magnetic field and not enough of a gravity well to maintain an atmosphere without it.

a reply to: Phage

On the second point you are making a broad assumption.

Merely repeating the view of one of the leaders of origin of life research - Harold Morowitz at the Santa Fe Institute and George Mason University.

a reply to: Astrocyte
We know very little about the origins of life (nothing, actually). To make such a claim can be nothing but an assumption.

Are you sure that was what he said? Or did he say that life would be different than it is?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: darkuniverse

Nope. Not constant thrust.
www.popsci.com...

Methane for fuel? Any methane beyond Mars?

Probably be dinged for off- topic post again . But here goes.....
Feed em pinto beans and burritos. They can carry their own fuel with em...or carry cows.

Elon Musk says SpaceX's new spaceship could go 'well beyond Mars'

But only if it doesn't blow up, as most of them have done so far.

originally posted by: MongolianPaellaFish

Elon Musk says SpaceX's new spaceship could go 'well beyond Mars'

But only if it doesn't blow up, as most of them have done so far.

False. Very, very false.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Phage

originally posted by: MongolianPaellaFish

Elon Musk says SpaceX's new spaceship could go 'well beyond Mars'

But only if it doesn't blow up, as most of them have done so far.

False. Very, very false.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Well, that's refreshing. Turns out it's only 21 failures between 2006-2016. Most rockets have been successful. I stand corrected.

a reply to: Phage

We know very little about the origins of life (nothing, actually). To make such a claim can be nothing but an assumption.

I think you should read his most recent publication with Eric Smith, The Origin and Nature of Life on Earth: The Emergence of the 4th Geosphere (2016).

Ultimately, it is wishful thinking to imagine that the setup which makes life possible on Earth could work without the sorts of contingencies - location in space, size of planet - that allow the processes to operate "far from equilibrium", but not to fall apart into chaos or become too ordered, as will happen on less-suitable planets.

Also, your assumption that nothing is known is completely disproved by Morowitz book. There is a very real order an structure to life's emergence.

Walter Montana at Harvard, a leading researcher in the field, gave it very high praise: "The Most significant book hitherto written on the Origins of Life".

In short, it coherently presents the planet we live upon and within (and are made of) as a coherently organized system with each living cell being governed by an "ecosystem property" i.e. the tricarboxylic acid cycle (and its reverse) termed by them the "core metabolism", around which a complex system of nodes, co-factors and oligomers form.

a reply to: MongolianPaellaFish

No. Not 21 rocket failures and you said "blown up."

a reply to: Astrocyte

Ultimately, it is wishful thinking to imagine that the setup which makes life possible on Earth could work without the sorts of contingencies - location in space, size of planet - that allow the processes to operate "far from equilibrium", but not to fall apart into chaos or become too ordered, as will happen on less-suitable planets.

Yeah. Earth was made for man. Sure. Life elsewhere is not possible.

Also, your assumption that nothing is known is completely disproved by Morowitz book. There is a very real order an structure to life's emergence.

Nothing is known about the origins of life. There are only hypotheses and assumptions.

Still, Professor Morowitz was more confident dismissing dogma, like creationism or intelligent design, than specifying how life originated on Earth.

www.nytimes.com...

But I agree, we are a long, long way from terraforming. That doesn't mean we can't live there. We do need to get our eggs out of this basket.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: darkuniverse

Nope. Not constant thrust.
www.popsci.com...

Methane for fuel? Any methane beyond Mars?

Plenty. But having enough readily available oxygen to combine it with?

originally posted by: BIGPoJo

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: darkuniverse

Nope. Not constant thrust.
www.popsci.com...

Methane for fuel? Any methane beyond Mars?

Plenty. But having enough readily available oxygen to combine it with?

Any water beyond Mars? And there is this:
solarviews.com...

a reply to: Phage
Europa has a ocean that engulfs the moon.

I gotta admire the guy but after watching Moonraker I'm sure he has some dastardly plan for world domination.
He has a Bond villain name so beware all.
I think he is going to blow up the moon for some crazy reason.

a reply to: Astrocyte

an eden project on mars would work, have you never seen total recall, humans have been proving themselves wrong from the beginning its called evolution, i like H.O.G.1 for a name, we could be the dirty pigs of the cosmos, probably wouldn't be to bad an analogy when we finally realise our place in this universe..

a reply to: Aliensun

LoL I'm dyslexic but even i'm not usually that bad, god damn tiny wee phone screen and auto correct to blame. Yes i did mean propulsion.

Don't know about a working solution regarding us devising a means to reach the stars just yet but a rather more efficient Ion propulsion system would allow us to pretty much cruise our own system making colonization rather more viable.

a reply to: darkuniverse

That's what i suspect myself, its the best solution we have to date that utilities technology available. Need to be rather more efficient than the current variety all the same.

a reply to: nOraKat

Right. We need to acknowledge the reality of a sub rosa attempt of this that is decades in the making already.

If we acknowledge ufology for what it is according to abductees and whistleblowers then this is what's going on. I find the idea that someone in the military, in the government or in some other shadowy enterprise didn't go: "There's, something going on here, 1. we need to know, 2. We need to acquire those capabilities ourselves".

This is what is going on, that is simply what must have happened if there was ever any merit at all to the subject. And they're still doing it. Not to mention the influences that any non humans could have had on us, such as trading of technologies or other things. And further, in what myriad ways might they have already influenced us earlier in history? This would change everything.

I have to laugh at this whole subject of space exploration because it feels like a cheap sideshow. Our airspace and indeed space itself is probably way more militarised than we know.

In other words: in secret rooms they do weird and amazing things. I think this argument in itself is almost axiomatic. You think they would do gruesome and unethical genetic experiments in public? No, they're gonna do it in some underground base or otherwise very secure installation. Don't think the military or other powerful interests would pursue such endeavours? Grow up.

I saw the first half of Stranger Things yesterday and that kind of stuff is probably ongoing somewhere in the continental US. This planet is so much weirder than the public thinks it is, crazy stuff happen all over the place all the time. Only a select few ever experience anything "paradigm shattering" enough and they are mostly derided as crazy. We cannot expect that what the public knows is all that is going on, especially when there's evidence to the contrary.

originally posted by: TheKnightofDoom
He has a Bond villain name so beware all.

Good point.