My Favorite Martian....look in the mirror

[DutyCat]

most accessible version is the Nasa publication:

http://www.nasa.gov/...l_corrected.pdf

and its corresponding Press release:

http://www.nasa.gov/...09/J09-030.html

I read the report and summary word for word. In the report, the authors go to great lengths to examine every suggested variation of the "thermal explanation" of magnetite formation and ultimately reject them all. They essentially say, "they got there by some other means, which does not exclude biogenic formation." Talk about covering your six.

The summary is much more revealing and basically just comes right out and essentially says, "Thermal decomposition just doesn't add up. Biological origin is still the most likely explanation." But again, not absolute proof as many point out.

while the drake equation is fun, I do tend to agree with Crichton's fun observation: the [Drake equation] can have any value from "billions and billions" to zero due to every variable being filled with guesstimates. An expression that can mean anything means nothing, making the Drake equation meaningless... hehe />

Crichton was being flippant and missed the point. As smart as he was, that comment made him appear smug and dismissive. The intent of the Drake Equation was to identify the factors that could be used to determine the number of intelligent civilizations in the galaxy. It was a critical thinking exercise. It not intended as a practically applied equation with an qualified answer. Crichton should have known better.

I forgot to post earlier that while Zubrin deserves a lot of credit for his forward thinking, vision and persistence; His writings often paint a rather rosy picture of a Mars mission, making it appear on the side of easier rather than harder.

Yes and no. I thought he went to great lengths to describe how hard it would be. However, what rings throughout his book is a sense of "We can do it if we want to. We just need the vision and commitment."

For example; we have no experience in landing anything close to the 40 ton payload described in Mars Direct. (For comparison Curiosity weighs a teeny 1980 lbs) closest being the lunar module@ 22,375 lb, and that was manned!

I remember reading somewhere that fellow NASA scientist's, (who are fans of the idea) found massive underestimations in zubrins predictions for crew consumables based on their space flights/ISS data , predicted launch weights were too low, and radiation risks glossed over.

unfortunately for these things, success really is in the details; and while Zubrin is obviously an ideas man; it will take meticulous and through planning for any theoretical mission to be given serious consideration. While I'm not exactly buzzing at the plans to go back to the moon; such a mission will help provide invaluable knowledge and experiences, essentially updating the field manual of what we do well, and what still needs work for a future mars mission in the 21st centuary

Raymond, Have your read this book? It is very detailed throughout. It is loaded with calculations that show that Zubrin has carefully considered every aspect not only his proposed Mars Direct mission, but of Mars and lunar colonization as well. His calculations and assumptions may be subject to refinement, but in my opinion he did very well getting out ahead in thinking about the specifics of what it would take to do all that he has proposed.

Now, having said that, I do not agree with Mars Direct. MD, IMO is a shoestring, high risk approach. It is almost like Zubrin proposed it because he thought that a more traditional approach had almost no chance of getting funded in the near term. Personally, I think we should go back to the moon first. It is the best place to pioneer the technology needed for long term surface exploration. Habitat modules, vehicles, consumables, logistics, etc, all need to be worked our in our backyard before going to Mars. I also think we should build a large, permanently manned, industrial capacity space station to assemble the vessels needed to explore the solar system. Basically I think a multinational "Battlestar Galactica" approach is the best. Build a vessel capable of taking a dozen or so explorers on a multi-year mission. The vessel could land on the surface of Mars itself and serve as a base for exploration, or stay in orbit and send down MEM (Mars Exploration Modules). If we are going to do it, let's do it right.

I realize that what I propose will likely not happen during my lifetime, or maybe even during that of my children. Maybe someday, if we can develop some vision and leadership.

Edited January 1, 2013 by DutyCat

[Raymond]

Crichton was being flippant and missed the point. As smart as he was, that comment made him appear smug and dismissive. The intent of the Drake Equation was to identify the factors that could be used to determine the number of intelligent civilizations in the galaxy. It was a critical thinking exercise. It not intended as a practically applied equation with an qualified answer. Crichton should have known better.

I thought id include it for facetiousness, But I do think he has a point. I get that the equation is basically a thought exercise on a set of parameters to help assess the probability of finding people like us. Its strongest support comes from the fact that we existed to think it up in the first place!

The problem being, while we know one golden recipe for intelligent life (us) the potential possibilities for different configurations of intelligent life in the universe mean the equations variables can be almost stretched to encompass anything and everything; meaning it will say whatever you want it to say. If it will say whatever you want it to, its moot as a tool for supporting a hypothesis.

e.g.if one enters infinity for all the variables, N will equal infinity. but since you knew this would be the case before using the equation, presumably you had a concept you were wanting to explain (since the numerical answer is not important) then why would one use the equation at all, when one can jump straight to discussing whatever idea one wanted to explore with N=∞.

Maby I'm wrong, but I think thats what Crichton was getting at

Raymond, Have your read this book? It is very detailed throughout. It is loaded with calculations that show that Zubrin has carefully considered every aspect not only his proposed Mars Direct mission, but of Mars and lunar colonization as well. His calculations and assumptions may be subject to refinement, but in my opinion he did very well getting out ahead in thinking about the specifics of what it would take to do all that he has proposed.

I have read the book when it first came out, so I admit im rusty, but as I know nothing of the mathmatics of space, Zubrin could put math that equaled a thousand dancing monkeys, and Id be none the wiser :D/>/>.

Hence why I'm always very cautious about such books; and why I would far prefer read his mars mission plan if it was a series of peer reviewed articles instead.

I totally agree with you that a incremental program to mars is probably the safest and best approach. With the current political/social/economic situation I see human space activity very much on the back burner; though eventually (probably kicking and screaming) people will realize that in order to continue life here; we need to go 'out there' :)

[DutyCat]

With the current political/social/economic situation I see human space activity very much on the back burner; though eventually (probably kicking and screaming) people will realize that in order to continue life here; we need to go 'out there'

Ain't that the truth.

[Raymond]

With great timing Skeptoid did an ep recently on the wow! signal:

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4342

[Crazy Snap Captain]

My theory is that God is the ultimate scale modeller.... ;)

[Horrido]

And on an interesting tangential note:

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/planets-oldest-fossils-found-in-pilbara-experts-say-20130101-2c3qs.html