TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Making Human Settlement of Space a Reality

367 点作者 jwfxpr超过 8 年前

30 条评论

nickff超过 8 年前
This is a very optimistic view of the president&#x27;s space exploration legacy. Cancelling George W. Bush&#x27;s &#x27;Vision for Space Exploration&#x27; may have been a wise political move, but doing so delayed the project by 8 years, with relatively little technical gain. We are now looking at spending 25 billion dollars for development, and 2 billion more per additional launch, with the aim of reaching an asteroid in the mid-2020s, and Mars in ~2040.<p>I will be shocked if the Space Launch System (A.K.A. SLS, Senate Launch System) takes humans to the moon, and I will be dumbstruck if anyone uses it to go to Mars. The system is simply too expensive, and the projected launch rate is too low for it to be useful. In addition, the system is too politically vulnerable, as the program would have to survive more than 20 years for someone to use it to go to Mars. Much like the current president cancelled his predecessor&#x27;s plan, a future president will cancel this one.
评论 #12688309 未加载
评论 #12686349 未加载
评论 #12686621 未加载
评论 #12689659 未加载
评论 #12690412 未加载
评论 #12691962 未加载
Super_Jambo超过 8 年前
It seems like a failure of imagination to me that the main plan is to start off sending lots of people to Mars. People are heavy, they need heavy life support, they&#x27;re fragile &amp; they require complex infrastructure to survive. If any of that support infrastructure breaks or there&#x27;s an interruption in resupply missions the people die. Probably they fight to see who dies first and waste valuable resources.<p>Yes people are very versatile but almost everything useful is going to be sent from earth for decades. If the plan for building human supporting infrastructure is well thought out we shouldn&#x27;t need much versatility.<p>Why not send as few humans as you can possibly get away with and as much semi-autonomous &amp; remote operated machinery as possible. Get some of the 7 billion people on earth to design it, drive it &amp; continually improve how autonomous it is (I imagine lag to mars will be a bitch).<p>This seems a far faster way to build a self sustaining mars backup civ. Bonus in that at some point this leads to self replicating self directed robots at which point send them to the asteroid belt &amp; everyone can retire.<p>To that end anyone want to make a remote operated maker space? Buy some cheap land or warehouse. Ship in raw materials and see if we can build a robot factory by remote. Price of admission is sending a remote operated vehicle guess we can wire it up and broadcast it to the web. Hopefully that can fund someone to replace batteries when they inevitably run flat.
评论 #12685849 未加载
评论 #12687924 未加载
评论 #12687067 未加载
评论 #12685671 未加载
评论 #12699978 未加载
评论 #12689420 未加载
评论 #12686138 未加载
ChuckMcM超过 8 年前
As with similar NASA vision statements about space, this is heavy on the what &quot;Send people to Mars&quot; and weak on the why, &quot;What do we gain by being space faring?&quot;<p>As a result it will be constantly under pressure from earthly issues that need money now. For example if you are a congress critter and asked to choose between funding a $1B for Zika virus research&#x2F;abatement and using that $1B for 1&#x2F;5 the cost of developing a new space booster system, people always choose the &#x27;today&#x27; problem and delay the &#x27;future&#x27; opportunity. No one wants to say &quot;Sorry, you&#x27;re unborn child was killed by a virus we could have stopped but we spent that money on a rocket.&quot;<p>This is why I am a huge fan of the Commercial Crew and other &#x27;private&#x27; industry programs. Let private industry develop the tools and techniques for space and unshackle from them the cold war restrictions.<p>And yes, that is the elephant in this particular room. While the &quot;west&quot; wrings its hands over the PRK developing an operational missile capability, have you ever thought what a Falcon 9 looks like through that lens? As a military weapon it could be considered the first Intercontinental Ballistic Bomber. Think about that capability, a Falcon 9 with a payload capable of some re-entry steering, launches from a base in the US, lets fly the payload, and then flys back to base for the next payload. Ten of these sitting on pads in the Dakotas could put 100 tons of conventional explosive on to any target in the eastern hemisphere in about 45 minutes.<p>That is the kind capability that SpaceX could &quot;market&quot; to third parties. And it isn&#x27;t something nation states like private companies to have.
评论 #12688200 未加载
评论 #12688063 未加载
评论 #12688042 未加载
评论 #12687931 未加载
评论 #12687935 未加载
评论 #12687934 未加载
arcanus超过 8 年前
Did Obama sign an executive order? Or is this a motivational announcement?<p>As a contrast, in my field (computational science) Obama signed an executive order (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.whitehouse.gov&#x2F;the-press-office&#x2F;2015&#x2F;07&#x2F;29&#x2F;executive-order-creating-national-strategic-computing-initiative" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.whitehouse.gov&#x2F;the-press-office&#x2F;2015&#x2F;07&#x2F;29&#x2F;execu...</a>) to enable the rapid development of exascale (next generation) supercomputers.<p>Funding is arguably even more critical for space exploration, and without substantial action on this front I am skeptical this is going to have meaningful impact.
评论 #12685354 未加载
nostromo超过 8 年前
I&#x27;d love to see people on Mars in my lifetime.<p>But the biggest problem longterm is that Mars will be a pretty miserable place to live.<p>Right now you can move to Antartica if you really wanted to. Do you? I don&#x27;t. And Antartica is a much more pleasant place to be than Mars for many reasons: you can breath the air, it&#x27;s got water, it&#x27;s quite a bit warmer, and you get almost twice as much sunlight.
评论 #12686399 未加载
评论 #12686736 未加载
评论 #12687693 未加载
评论 #12687593 未加载
评论 #12690459 未加载
评论 #12692984 未加载
zipwitch超过 8 年前
I&#x27;ve been following space news since I was a kid in the 70s, and now I&#x27;m to the point where I find these repetitions of &quot;Mars in ~25 years&quot; to be more pathetically sad than anything else.<p>Maybe Musk and SpaceX will succeed, maybe not. But either way, he&#x27;s not playing the same tired tune I&#x27;ve heard my entire life.
评论 #12686612 未加载
评论 #12686300 未加载
评论 #12685981 未加载
ryao超过 8 年前
I would prefer it if we made human settlement of the oceans a reality first. Human settlement of space has health problems that are not yet solved such as vision damage from zero gravity environments and brain damage from cosmic radiation.<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.space.com&#x2F;25392-manned-mars-mission-astronaut-vision.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.space.com&#x2F;25392-manned-mars-mission-astronaut-vis...</a> <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.rt.com&#x2F;document&#x2F;57fc69bac46188c6758b4599&#x2F;amp" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.rt.com&#x2F;document&#x2F;57fc69bac46188c6758b4599&#x2F;amp</a><p>Making underwater habitats is far more practical in the short term. Experience in making closed environments for human habitation of the ocean would be useful when the problems with space exploration are solved.
评论 #12688183 未加载
评论 #12688487 未加载
评论 #12689788 未加载
评论 #12688256 未加载
dathmar超过 8 年前
More of the same from government promising Mars in X years. This will just be killed off by the next president. If this was serious it would have been announced at the beginning of his 8 years. We could have even put some of the ~550 billion spent on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. We probably would have gotten more bang for our buck.<p>I also wonder how much of this was brought about just to point out that the US will not be supporting SpaceX&#x27;s hopes of a Mars mission.
评论 #12689125 未加载
Animats超过 8 年前
If this happens, it&#x27;s going to be because Lockheed Martin gets their fusion plant going. Back in 2014, Lockheed Martin announced that their Skunk Works unit was working on building a fusion reactor.[1] Last May, the head of the Skunk Works announced quietly that they&#x27;d achieved initial plasma and were investing more money in the project.[2]<p>The Skunk Works produced the U-2, the SR-71, and the first stealth fighter. They&#x27;re really good at building things. They have money. They have very good people. If anybody can make this work, it&#x27;s them.<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.lockheedmartin.com&#x2F;us&#x2F;products&#x2F;compact-fusion.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.lockheedmartin.com&#x2F;us&#x2F;products&#x2F;compact-fusion.htm...</a> [2] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.defensenews.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;defense&#x2F;innovation&#x2F;2016&#x2F;05&#x2F;03&#x2F;lockheed-nuclear-fusion-generator-investment&#x2F;83870398&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.defensenews.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;defense&#x2F;innovation&#x2F;2016&#x2F;05&#x2F;...</a>
simonh超过 8 年前
&gt; And that brings us to the first thing we’re excited to discuss today. NASA has already begun laying the groundwork for these deep space missions. In 2014 we issued....<p>And then spends the next paragraph talking about something they did in 2014. The whole page is like that.
danblick超过 8 年前
Question: it seems there is a lot of overlap between the technology required for space exploration and the technology needed for ICBMs. To what extent was space exploration in the Mercury-Apollo missions a way to make a huge investment in ICBM technology palatable to the public? Does anyone know good documentaries that discuss this?<p>(Put it another way: how important was R&amp;D done in the name of human space exploration to the development of ICBM capabilities?)
评论 #12691622 未加载
maverick_iceman超过 8 年前
I wonder why there aren&#x27;t any realistic plans for using nuclear propulsion. Chemical rockets simply produce too low thrust. Using nuclear pulse&#x2F;fission fragment rockets the solar system can be explored in a matter of months, rather than the years&#x2F;decades that we&#x27;re currently forced to endure. Project Orion was supposed to be feasible with 60s technology. Why aren&#x27;t we trying to make similar technologies work?
评论 #12687034 未加载
评论 #12686264 未加载
评论 #12688805 未加载
theothermkn超过 8 年前
If the human settlement of space is to be made a reality, then the plans for it need to be more measured and realistic.<p>First, it needs to be recognized that we don&#x27;t know how human biology is going to cope with the radiation and gravity environment encountered in space. More precisely, we know that our biology copes poorly, and we don&#x27;t know how to fix that from a biological perspective. The only solutions we have in our grasp are one, bring the gravity up to 1G with a rotating habitat, and two, shield humans from the radiation experienced in space with magnets and mass. Any reasonable plan to &quot;settle&quot; space must <i>begin</i> by addressing these.<p>Second, Mars is just not the place to start, because it&#x27;s too far away. People are fond of pointing out that Mars&#x27;s atmosphere makes landing there less costly than landing on the Moon, but this ignores the fact that you have to bring life support and food along for the 4- to 6-month long trip. (The atmosphere is also very little help, for example, for Musk&#x27;s plan.) It is more accurate to say that it is slightly less costly to land on Mars <i>for a day</i> than it is to <i>land an entire Lunar base and live on the Moon for 6 months.</i> Add to this the return trip time to Earth for emergencies (or the time it takes to send emergency supplies and crew), and the Moon wins, hands down. (Indeed, a better place to work out how to survive on Mars would be if you could find places on the Moon where we couldn&#x27;t land and had to rely on weeks of overland travel from a landing site to get there.)<p>Third, the absolute first step should be an experimental, shielded, rotating habitat (probably built from Lunar materials) in orbit either outside of Earth&#x27;s van Allen belts or around the Moon. This habitat should be of sufficient size to address the effects of, at least, Moon-like (1&#x2F;6) and Mars-like (1&#x2F;3) gravity on human subjects for multiple years. It needs to either be able to spin up and down to these values, have separate sections for Mars and Moon gravity, or we need to have a separate base on the Moon. We already know that space kills us in many, many ways. Until we have characterized <i>how we&#x27;re even going to survive</i> there, there is absolutely no sense in talking about <i>settling</i> there.<p>Any announcement that doesn&#x27;t address these directly is just PR.
评论 #12686618 未加载
评论 #12688806 未加载
smoyer超过 8 年前
This work aboard the space station is the heart and soul of the first stage of NASA’s Journey to Mars; a stage we call “Earth Dependent.”<p>The ISS and shuttle are (or in the case of the shuttle &quot;were&quot;) broadly considered a waste. There was a recent article posted here that described how they really only existed for each other ... and to give NASA a public facing &quot;expedition&quot;.
评论 #12686125 未加载
frederikvs超过 8 年前
from the article : &#x27;the newly created Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships or “NextSTEP” program&#x27;<p>They might have just googled for their abbreviations first, so that they wouldn&#x27;t collide with an important historical operating system [0]. I get that it&#x27;s hard to find an unused three-letter acronym, but with 8 characters you really should be able to find something unused.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;NeXTSTEP" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;NeXTSTEP</a>
评论 #12685757 未加载
评论 #12686418 未加载
eddieh超过 8 年前
Wow, so much naysaying here. When I hear about private plans vs government plans I think back to what Neil deGrasse Tyson said:<p>&gt; <i>Private enterprise will never lead a space frontier. In all the history of human conduct, it’s as clear to me as day follows night that private enterprise won’t do that, because it’s expensive. It’s dangerous. You have uncertainty and risks, because you’re dealing with things that haven’t been done before. That’s what it means to be on a frontier. [...] The government is better suited to these kinds of investments. They have a longer time horizon. They’re not shackled to quarterly reports like you see in a private enterprise.</i><p>I tend to agree with him. I&#x27;m betting on the government to get humans there first. But I&#x27;ll be happy to eat humble pie.
abalone超过 8 年前
What about making human settlement of oceans a reality? Like, not just the surface but the floors too. Seems like a suitably grand technology project with massive potential benefits. I never hear about it though.. not sexy enough? Doesn&#x27;t capture the imagination?
评论 #12688152 未加载
评论 #12687818 未加载
cydonian_monk超过 8 年前
As nice as this is, it really is little more than an empty recap statement, and leaves so many questions. When, exactly? There are seven or so decent launch windows between now and &quot;the 2030s,&quot; so what are we targeting? With what money? It&#x27;s nice that nextSTEP selected six firms, but aside from Space-X (who is not on the list, mind you) I can&#x27;t see others willingly donating hardware and personnel without compensation. What steps are being taken to insure this project won&#x27;t be hacked to death by political whims?<p>More importantly: How can I (or any other individual) help? There&#x27;s precious little actionable data in this release.
评论 #12686010 未加载
tdhz77超过 8 年前
Does anybody know how one could get involved in Mars Settlement. I would like to help out and go.
评论 #12686488 未加载
评论 #12684977 未加载
评论 #12685165 未加载
评论 #12686448 未加载
评论 #12685007 未加载
评论 #12685229 未加载
pascalxus超过 8 年前
Before we spend the enormous amount money needed to settle humans on mars, I really think we should be spending that money or effort to help people settle Earth. Homelessness is still a big issue in cities. And last time I checked, the vast majority of the middle class hasn&#x27;t even paid off their own home, not to mention property taxes. It doesn&#x27;t make sense to build housing in outer-space when we can&#x27;t even do it affordably on our own planet. IMHO<p>Don&#x27;t get me wrong. I think space is cool and fun, but that&#x27;s what science fiction movies are for, and the discovery channel&#x2F;books, if you want non-fiction.
评论 #12687874 未加载
评论 #12690439 未加载
评论 #12687581 未加载
prewett超过 8 年前
So I suppose a Cassini-budget probe to Uranus or Neptune in my lifetime is probably not going to happen with Mars sucking up all the funding?<p>Mars is cool, but I don&#x27;t think a Mars colony is realistic. I&#x27;d rather pay to see what the last two planetary systems look like.
sdegutis超过 8 年前
&gt; &quot;We have set a clear goal vital to the next chapter of America’s story in space: sending humans to Mars by the 2030s and returning them safely to Earth, with the ultimate ambition to one day remain there for an extended time.&quot;<p>Wait, why? Why do we <i>have to</i>?
评论 #12694345 未加载
perseusprime11超过 8 年前
Do we even need the govt in this anymore beyond just encouraging companies like SpaceX?
fiatjaf超过 8 年前
With your dollars we can do it!
once-in-a-while超过 8 年前
I can&#x27;t believe there&#x27;s a serious discussion about this topic. Even if you overcome the technical challenges (which I doubt), people would get depressed on any planet other than Earth. All other planets are just insanely sad for human life. Our soul would suffer to dead...
评论 #12687643 未加载
评论 #12687152 未加载
评论 #12688458 未加载
hasbroslasher超过 8 年前
Meanwhile a significant number of people starve to death globally.<p>Not to be the eternal downer, but I just can&#x27;t understand how we haven&#x27;t figured out proper income distribution but think we&#x27;ll be able to deal with becoming extraterrestrials.
评论 #12688506 未加载
cowardlydragon超过 8 年前
Just help fund SpaceX&#x27;s plan<p>OR<p>Set up a moon base to help the plan<p>OR<p>Help nuclear pulse drives for the interplanetary trips.
anti_censor超过 8 年前
Barack trying to steal Musk&#x27;s thunder?
kfrat超过 8 年前
Making Human Settlement of Space a Reality; So We Can Have a Nanotech Accident and it Won&#x27;t Affect Earth. Also see: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Grey_goo" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Grey_goo</a>
matchagaucho超过 8 年前
... but Elon has better video simulations.