Will mankind reach Mars?

[MoonRocker]

a) What sort of technical advances will be required to reach Mars?
b) How long do you think it will be before the first man on Mars and subsequent safe return?
c) What are the benefits to mankind of working towards this goal?

[naomi24]

I don’t doubt man will reach Mars – and beyond – eventually. I think, in the main, we have a habit of limiting our imagination to current knowledge – and that’s a big mistake. We may think we know it all, but we have much to learn. Man, as far as science and technology is concerned, is in his infancy.

[HowardKennitby]

I think that most of the required technological advances are dependent on the astronauts returning to Earth. If you consider a one-way trip then I believe it could happen quite soon.
As to your third point, who knows?

[MarkRae]

We've been on this planet for a tiny amount of time relative to its age but, in the assumption that we don't blow ourselves off the face of it, we have to be able to live elsewhere in the universe eventually.

[starone]

I wish they would get a move on. I have read so much about it, if they don't hurry up I shall not be alive to see it, and I would like to.

[jomifl]

MoonRocker, regrettably interesting questions don't come up very often in the science section. It seems to be mostly a homework help section. There are some very knowledgeable people who frequent this section but you may have to wait a while for them all to turn up.
Re. the Mars question, I think it is inevitable that man will reach mars someday but the way robotics is progressing it probably won't be necessary unless some far sighted government wants to establish a permanent inhabited base. My guess is that China will be the first nation to get to Mars if they don't go down the road of democracy. They have more reasons than most for wanting to settle on Mars and are probably more psychologically suited to it.

[MoonRocker]

That's an interesting point, is democracy an inhibitor to scientific advancement? I think it probably is as politicians are always concerned with re-election and popularity generally. However, as much as I'm in favour of progress I think I'd rather do it more slowly under democracy.

[Clanad]

It would appear that MoonRocker's rationale of democracy somehow being a hindrance to scientific advance is orthogonal to reality. All interplanetary and inter-lunar as well as exo-solar system exploration has occurred from only democratic societies so far. China only yesterday launched its first astronaut ... Consider the Hubble as an excellent example of such technology...

[mike11111]

"It would appear that MoonRocker's rationale of democracy somehow being a hindrance to scientific advance is orthogonal to reality"

Anyone speak English here?

[mibn2cweus]

. . . their first female astronaut Clanad. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yang_Liwei

[jomifl]

Clanad, the chines ar making rapid progress in space technology and they have huge resources, progress so far;

/China first launched a man into space in 2003 followed by a two-man mission in 2005 and a three-man trip in 2008 that featured the country's first space walk.

In November 2011, the unmanned Shenzhou 8 successfully docked twice with Tiangong 1 by remote control./
The current mission has a crew of 3

[jake-the-peg]

Perhaps I can answer these in reverse order:

c) Precious few - unless a spectacular event occurs like the discovery of a martian fossil it's difficult tosee what possible benefit this enormous expenditure could have - sucessive American Presidents have announced this only to cancel it when NASA shows them the bill

Note if the Moon were covered in gold bars we could not bring them back and make a profit - how much more so Mars!

b) Safe return is the hard part - you have to bring enough fuel to escape the martian gravity which is much stronger than the moon's -and you have to get that out of the Earths - the first manned trip to Mars (if there ever is one) could be one-way! Don't under estimate this option there would be voluneers.

c)One of the significant challenges is to keep the crew healthy on a trip of over a year - right now people in space that long are often very weak whthyretn They also need shielding from radiation from the Sun - you can risk a quick trip to the Moon but you *will* get solar flares in the time taken to get to Mars

I don't think anybody living today will see he first man step on Mars - the cost/benefits just aren't there

[nannybooby]

A none if you live near Slough Trading Estate - shank's pony will do fine
B depends on how many he eats before getting sick
C free mars bars for all

[MoonRocker]

clanad, it's not my rationale, I was just exploring the idea first suggested by jomifl, I'm not saying it's definately the case just acknowledging that a suitable motivated dictatorship could make faster progress when other political concerns are removed.

[nannybooby]

Seriously though , why should we expect benefits from another world ? We've made such a mess here or do you think we could use it as a giant dumping ground to clean up our world?

[MoonRocker]

Who said anything about benefits from another world? In c above I was referring to the discoveries and inventions along the way. Like the moon landings, many of the advances have advanced us on earth enormously, I'm not talking about exploitation here.

[doctordb]

Billions of pounds were spent on the race to the moon. No-one has set foot on it since 1972. I don't envisage any manned spacecraft landing on mars as it is so inhospitable. I think that in the future man will explore the depths of the solar system with a series of space stations strung out in a line which would enable shorter journey's. But when? Your guess is as good as mine.

[rowanwitch]

If I were a scientist and had no responsibilites or emotional ties I'd consider a one way trip to mars might be worth the ride... so long as I had a painless way out at the end..

[HowardKennitby]

^

me too

[jake-the-peg]

I understand what you mean Moonrocker but I don't think you can justify a project based on incidental benefits that might come about from a such a project.

I might well argue that the trillions spent on this could as easilly be spent on direct reseach in areas of benefit.

There are not limitless funds involved here - for the price of a manned Martian mission there's an awful lot of work that could be done on cancer research, more efficient energy systems like high temperature superconductors and nuclear fusion, material research etc. etc.

Ironically a manned mars mission would set science back decades - huge amounts of science funding would be hacked back to pay for it - see this alreay oin tems of the international space station - I don't see an awful lot coming out of that yet.