Mars Attacks We Will Never Colonize Mars
Can we send a living man to Mars and have him return as pretty much the same guy as he was before he left and came back? Let’s go with no, not gonna happen…
By Egon E. Mosum
We’ve been looking in our imagination, at life on Mars, whether indigenous or colonial for more than a century.
It has been a fantasy of mankind well before Sputnik or the Apollo projects.
Martian life has been a staple of science fiction since H.G. Wells, throughout the time of the pulp magazines, and even in movies with Tom Cruise, who might himself be a form of alien life.
Let’s emphasize that word ‘fantasy,’ let’s be cognizant of the term ‘science fiction.’
Why? Because the chances of mankind visiting Mars in the flesh (living flesh that is) and coming back to Earth (still alive) are somewhere equal to the Vatican becoming a major venue for bar mitzvahs.
The chances of man colonizing and living on Mars are less than finding an honest politician or a celibate clergyman.
In less sarcastic words — it ain’t gonna happen. Not now, not in a century from now.
Can we send a small robot to Mars and learn a bunch of science stuff?
Yes, we can, we already have.
Can we send a living man to Mars and have him return as pretty much the same guy as he was before he left and came back?
Let’s go with no, not gonna happen.
So, in support of the above negativity, let’s get real — as in scientific reality…
America’s Newest $1B Unicorn Has Arrived
A U.S. startup just hit a $1 billion valuation, joining billion-dollar private companies like SpaceX, OpenAI, and ByteDance.
Unlike those other unicorns, you can invest.*
Over 35,000 people already have. So have industry giants like General Motors and POSCO.
Why all the interest? EnergyX’s patented tech can recover 300% more lithium than traditional methods. That's a big deal, as demand for lithium is expected to 18X current production levels by 2040.
Now, they’re moving to commercial production, tapping into 100,000+ acres of lithium deposits in Chile, a potential $1.1B in annual revenue opportunity, at projected market prices.
Right now, you can invest at $10/share before the price changes on October 30.
‘Long-term human space missions such as a future journey to Mars could be characterized by several hazards, among which radiation is one the highest-priority problems for astronaut health.‘[1]
Effects of that radiation which are well known, ‘cancer, cardiovascular disease and cognitive decrements’[2]
Even if those conditions don’t immediately kill a volunteer astronaut, are those risks he or she would be willing to take for photo op with the Martian moon Phobos in the background?
Not likely.
In fact, a physicist with the European Space Agency has opined, ‘As it stands today, we can’t go to Mars due to radiation. It would be impossible to meet acceptable dose limits.’[3]
Note to self: Elon Musk is not a physicist.
Okay, so radiation is a major obstacle to Martian manned exploration, it could be a recipe for deep fried spaceman, a meal nobody wants to be responsible for cooking.
Then, there is the communication problem given the distance between Mars and Earth.
Radio signals travel at the speed of light, one hundred and eighty-six thousand miles per second.
Now, when we are talking about moon landings, we are talking round trip communications of a couple of seconds. When we look at Mars-Earth communications we are talking as much as forty minutes for a round-trip question-answer transmission and receipt.[4]
You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to realize a forty minute delay in communication can be potentially fatal when a problem out in space arises.
It gets worse. For a two-week period there will be a communications blackout due to ‘periods of solar conjunction every 26 months, when the Sun is between Earth and Mars.’[5]
Besides radiation and communication problems, there is the pesky little detail of getting the craft to land on Mars in one piece, and the astronauts therein in the same condition plus their being alive and well.
Now, ‘a human mission to Mars will likely require a vehicle between 50 – 100 metric tons, depending on the configuration. These larger vehicles will be too heavy to be slowed significantly by aerodynamic drag in Mars’ thin atmosphere, which has less than 1% the density of Earth’s.’[6]
So we’d have to figure out how to use rockets to slow the descent of the spacecraft enough so that the spacemen don’t arrive DOA -- difficult but not impossible.
Okay, so let’s assume we successfully land our astronauts alive and well and visiting — not living — on Mars.
Can we get him back alive?
The longer the Mars mission on planet, the more weight is required to be launched from Earth to support the astronauts’ existence. Also Mars-Earth distance can increase during this period of time, thereby requiring more fuel for a return trip.
Paradoxically, according to NASA, ‘As mission duration decreases, the total energy required to perform a roundtrip Mars mission increases exponentially, significantly increasing Earth-launched mass.’[7]
One possible solution is to send the re-entry vehicle to Mars first, so when it’s time to say arrivederci Mars, the astronauts have their ride ready and waiting.
Of course, the problem with that is who is going to maintain the ‘taxi’ back to earth while the astronauts are on route? There are only certain remote fixes possible without ‘hands on.’
But assuming we could get someone on Mars and bring him back alive, does that mean we could colonize the planet? Could Mars be the spare planetary tire in our trunk to use in case the earth really turns flat one day?
Not likely.
How many humans would we need to create an effective self-sustaining colony on Mars?
Low estimates range from one hundred to five hundred,[8]
When you see a range like that, the real answer is likely ‘we don’t have a clue.’
But let’s say the numbers are right, and for the sake of argument, let’s take a middle figure and go with three hundred.
So far, we haven’t had a craft that could send ten people anywhere in space at one time. But, let’s suppose we did. It could take thirty flights to get the requisite number of people to form that Martian colony, and in the interim, how many of those that were there would get sick, die, or go crazy?
Then there is the tendency for humans to not always get along that well. Would those three hundred be able to cooperate when there is no ‘green green grass of home,’ they are living in a rock-strewn desert, where a uniform puncture can mean death, where everything about the planet can kill them without the proper protection?
So we have to realize the technological, physiological and psychological challenges of a Martian colony.
One would think before even seriously thinking about colonizing Mars, we would have successfully colonized the Moon. But we haven’t, we haven’t even yet tried, and that is a cake walk compared to a Martian colonization.
Then there is the infrastructure that would be required to sustain a colony—and we are talking not about a colonized planet as a spare tire safety measure for earthlings, we are talking about a short duration research experiment.
How do we get the required material to the planet? How do we get spare parts to the planet, which is going to be rather tough on structures? If we are planning on using Martian materials to sustain the colony, how are we going to transport the equipment necessary to gather and process them?
The current answer is ‘who knows?’
WHY YOU SHOULD CARE
Now, the same guy that is touting a Martian colony in a few years, is the same guy that is getting a boatload of your tax bucks from the United States government—Elon Musk.
Now, no matter what you think about Musk, the above two statements are indisputable. What also is indisputable, this is the guy that brought us the Cybertruck, which has on multiple occasions made the slogan ‘next time, take the train’ a rather good idea.
Numerous malfunctions and recalls do not a reliable vehicle make.
Then there is Musk’s SpaceX. The majority of the flights have been successful, but who would want to be on the ones that exploded?
How many SpaceX flights — even unmanned — have gone to Mars as of the writing of this article?
None. The first ones are planned (‘planned” is the operative word), for 2026.
The bottom line is given all of the challenges of manned flight and return to Mars, given the challenges of establishing a self sustaining research colony on Mars, it ain’t happening any time soon — if at all.
We have not even addressed the possibility of an actual permanent Martian colony.
Will everyone have to be a trained astronaut? Will everybody have to be tested for their psychological and physical conditions and possible problems?
What would be the effect of the Martian environment on human pregnancy and human development? We have no clue. And given the ethics of human experimentation that would be required, we aren’t getting that clue any time soon.
So, when it comes to colonies on Mars, go to the science fiction section of your library, because it isn’t likely that in the reader’s lifetime, he will find anything in the history section.
[1] A Mission to Mars: Prediction of GCR Doses and Comparison with Astronaut Dose Limits 1/24/23 International Journal of Molecular Science Ramos, et. al. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9916691/
[2] IBID.
[3] EUORPEAN SPACE AGENCY 5/31/19 Quoting Marco Durante, Physicist. https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Human_and_Robotic_Exploration/The_radiation_showstopper_for_Mars_exploration
[4] Challenges facing the human exploration of Mars The Planetary Society Atkinson 7/12/24 https://www.planetary.org/articles/challenges-facing-the-human-exploration-of-mars
[5] IBID.
[6] IBID.
[7] MARS TRANSPORTATION NASA https://www3.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/acr22-wp-mars-transportation.pdf
[8] How Many People Would It Take to Start a Self-Sufficient Mars Colony? 8/18/23 TECHNOLOGY.ORG https://www.technology.org/2023/08/18/how-many-people-would-it-take-to-start-a-self-sufficient-mars-colony/
*This is a paid advertisement for EnergyX's Regulation A+ Offering. Please read the offering circular at invest.energyx.com/. Under Regulation A+, a company has the ability to change its share price by up to 20%, without requalifying the offering with the SEC.
