Technology @lemmy.world werefreeatlast @lemmy.world 2mo ago

How can we get to Mars faster

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

Notice the continuous mention of bones.

32 comments

What a dumbass. If we send people in the quickest possible way (or any way at all, really) and they all die in the attempt, that will set the whole project back decades.

The answer to the radiation problem is better shielding, not a fundamentally unsafe mission.

btw it is not the nuclear propulsion that I'm calling unsafe. It is the idea that we could do without redundancy. That's just a monumentally stupid idea.
- Since the astronauts need water to survive, why not line the spaceship with reservoirs of it to provide the shielding? Or does water not block space radiation well enough?
  
  They did that in the novel "Seveneves", used a massive chunk of ice as the bow of their ship on a one-way, twenty year plus trip. It didn't stop all the radiation, though. Just enough to keep a minimum number of crew alive to complete their mission. They all developed different types of cancers, anyways,but the kinds that could be treated along the way and extend their chances.
  
  But then they’re drinking irradiated water, no?
  
  Unless it’s really easy to remove the radiation safely, this doesn’t seem like the right solution.
  
  You would need a pretty good thickness of water and it becomes complicated shipping it up into space.
  
  Liquid and rockets is a death sentence.
  
  Liquid and space vessels is worse.
  
  Liquids on reentry is never going to happen.
- Calm down, he was answering "how fast could we get there". It was never meant to be a realistic time frame.
  
  His disdain for NASA's caution is obvious.
Why?
- Because we (technically) can?

32 comments