Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #598993 > unrolled thread
| Started by | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-09-30 15:42 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-10-05 13:25 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 192 — 29 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-30 15:42 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-30 19:50 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 20:43 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 21:16 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 21:22 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-30 22:47 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-10-01 13:48 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2016-10-01 15:27 +0100
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-01 09:53 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2016-10-01 21:53 +0100
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-01 16:06 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 13:31 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-10-01 15:03 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-10-02 14:54 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-10-02 00:18 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 09:31 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-01 09:57 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 08:11 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-01 18:03 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 15:47 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-01 16:10 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-01 21:15 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-01 16:21 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-01 22:12 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 17:28 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-07 22:51 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 21:26 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-08 05:32 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-08 13:59 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-10-03 10:20 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-03 17:11 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-10-06 10:27 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-06 18:26 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-03 22:12 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 18:16 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-01 22:28 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-10-02 02:18 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 16:47 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-02 23:17 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 19:44 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-02 23:50 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-10-03 10:29 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-03 17:15 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-10-06 10:47 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-06 14:40 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-03 22:24 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-01 20:43 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2016-10-02 23:17 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-02 23:48 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2016-10-03 11:57 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-10-03 10:37 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-03 17:17 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-03 22:30 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 20:17 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-02 20:48 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 21:10 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-03 05:14 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-10-03 14:45 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-04 00:12 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-10-04 12:32 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-04 18:41 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2016-10-04 14:59 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-04 19:44 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "Brian M. Scott" <b.scott@csuohio.edu> - 2016-10-04 16:04 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2016-10-04 21:45 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-04 22:12 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2016-10-04 16:13 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-05 00:06 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2016-10-04 19:39 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-05 05:06 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-10-04 23:07 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-05 05:24 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-10-05 21:28 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2016-10-05 19:55 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-06 04:29 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-10-06 08:01 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-06 18:29 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-06 04:19 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2016-10-06 18:02 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-06 18:30 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "Gary R. Schmidt" <grschmidt@acm.org> - 2016-10-08 00:38 +1100
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-07 21:51 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2016-10-07 00:33 +0200
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 11:28 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-06 12:00 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-06 18:46 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 13:05 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-06 20:29 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 13:40 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-06 20:58 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 19:24 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-07 04:54 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 22:11 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-06 23:10 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 09:15 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-07 10:12 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 10:15 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-07 14:29 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2016-10-08 01:32 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-07 21:55 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 15:43 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-07 22:55 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 16:23 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-08 01:47 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 21:25 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-08 05:34 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-10-06 17:31 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 16:14 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-06 18:48 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 16:53 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-07 12:04 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 10:15 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-07 14:37 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 13:14 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-07 17:30 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 15:45 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-07 22:22 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 21:25 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-08 13:43 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-07 22:01 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "Brian M. Scott" <b.scott@csuohio.edu> - 2016-10-06 20:42 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-06 06:53 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-10-06 07:58 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-06 08:08 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-06 18:38 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2016-10-04 15:56 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-05 00:14 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2016-10-04 19:39 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-05 05:25 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-10-03 11:00 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-03 17:20 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-03 22:07 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-10-06 13:45 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-06 21:13 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-06 21:22 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-07 04:59 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-07 12:17 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-04 00:26 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 17:35 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-03 21:12 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-02 22:32 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-03 05:15 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 17:23 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-10-08 12:20 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-01 05:30 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 09:35 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Juho Julkunen <giaotanj@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-01 18:17 +0300
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-01 18:12 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Juho Julkunen <giaotanj@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-02 01:17 +0300
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 19:08 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-02 00:11 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 16:50 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-02 23:26 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-01 20:47 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-02 00:09 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Juho Julkunen <giaotanj@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-02 22:06 +0300
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 16:54 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-02 23:40 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-03 08:29 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-01 20:46 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 21:27 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 16:56 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-01 18:07 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-30 19:24 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-01 11:38 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-01 11:53 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-01 15:20 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-01 12:00 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> - 2016-10-02 09:02 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 11:26 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-10-02 16:56 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> - 2016-10-02 19:53 -0400
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-03 08:30 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 13:41 +0000
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says "Peter Bender" <pbender@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-04 07:00 +0200
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-04 10:25 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-10-03 10:34 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-03 17:29 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-03 13:41 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-10-05 17:37 +0200
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-10-05 11:20 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-05 14:11 -0500
lift-off noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 20:08 -0700
Re: lift-off Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-03 08:32 -0500
Re: lift-off edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-10-03 11:07 -0700
Re: lift-off rbrteline@gmail.com - 2016-10-03 12:45 -0700
Re: lift-off Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-03 17:31 -0500
Re: lift-off edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-10-06 13:41 -0700
Re: lift-off Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-06 21:40 -0500
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-10-05 17:36 +0200
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 10:41 -0700
Re: 1st Mars Colonists Should Be 'Prepared to Die,' Elon Musk Says Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-10-05 13:25 -0500
Page 7 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 Next page →
| From | "Brian M. Scott" <b.scott@csuohio.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-06 20:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <176j8b81dx91m.hdnvggdfajec.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #599723 |
On Thu, 06 Oct 2016 11:28:40 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote in<news:XnsA69974C2AA4AFtaustingmail@69.16.179.42> in rec.arts.sf.written,sci.physics,alt.astronomy: [...] > If it were easy, Discovery Channel would have a reality > show with D list actors in a dance contest at the bottom > of the Marianas Trench. Bingo. Brian -- It was the neap tide, when the baga venture out of their holes to root for sandtatties. The waves whispered rhythmically over the packed sand: haggisss, haggisss, haggisss.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-06 06:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnvbt7i.3me.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #599640 |
David DeLaney wrote: > jimp wrote: > > David DeLaney wrote: > > > jimp wrote: > > > > Don Bruder wrote: ----snip---- > > > > > > What is difficult about running a pipe to the surface > > > > > > and an air pump for air and a boat to the nearest store > > > > > > for beer and other sundries? > > > > > > Tell me, does the distance "32 feet" mean anything to you in > > > this context? How about a "Torricellian vacuum"? > > > > Not in the context of an underwater structure. > > > > Does the term "submarine snorkel" mean anything to you? > > ... Go look up how long submarine snorkels ARE, and how close > to the surface one needs to be to use one, please. Sheesh. That's not relevant. The snorkel connects two atmospheres that are at the same pressure; the submarine's atmosphere is held there by the hull, which absorbs the pressure of the water it's in. > > > > You have yet to define any real challenge to being under > > > > water on Earth. > > > > > > Anyone want to clue him in on the ones OTHER than "there's > > > no AIR there, dude"? > > > > Anyone want to explain how an air pump on the surface works? > > Anyone want to explain WHY I invoked "32 feet", up there, > to him? It's basic physics... So is the function of a submarine hull. > which he seems to not have ever encountered. Tch. You're waving a double-edged sword there, Dave. Ned
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-06 07:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <SdSdnWFEhJny12vKnZ2dnUU7-LGdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #599640 |
On 2016-10-06, David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote: > On 2016-10-05, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote: >>> Anyone want to clue him in on the ones OTHER than "there's no AIR there, >>> dude"? >> >> Anyone want to explain how an air pump on the surface works? > > Anyone want to explain WHY I invoked "32 feet", up there, to him? It's basic > physics... which he seems to not have ever encountered. -- oh, _I_ see. You're assuming some sort of "perfectly sealed and strengthened" people pod which has one (1) atmosphere of, well, atmosphere inside. In which case, sure, I'll grant you an air pump. Now... are you envisioning one (1) snorkel-type tube? Are you envisioning it as compressible? As flexible, and if so, how exactly? And have you taken into account the effect (cumulative) of ocean currents? (Of course, you COULD be envisioning - since you still haven't given any actual details - these people pods floating along comfortably five feet, or five yards, below the surface, or in shallow water just offshore like an extension of the boardwalk. Which does indeed minimize or remove many of the categories of problems ... but which ALSO doesn't count very well towards either research or exploration.) Dave -- \/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK> website on VIC is down, probably for good - oh well/ I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-06 08:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nt5id1$10gl$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #599666 |
On 10/6/2016 7:58 AM, David DeLaney wrote:
> On 2016-10-06, David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> On 2016-10-05, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Anyone want to clue him in on the ones OTHER than "there's no AIR there,
>>>> dude"?
>>> Anyone want to explain how an air pump on the surface works?
>>
>> Anyone want to explain WHY I invoked "32 feet", up there, to him? It's basic
>> physics... which he seems to not have ever encountered.
> -- oh, _I_ see. You're assuming some sort of "perfectly sealed and
> strengthened" people pod which has one (1) atmosphere of, well, atmosphere
> inside. In which case, sure, I'll grant you an air pump.
>
> Now... are you envisioning one (1) snorkel-type tube? Are you envisioning it
> as compressible? As flexible, and if so, how exactly? And have you taken into
> account the effect (cumulative) of ocean currents?
> (Of course, you COULD be envisioning - since you still haven't given any actual
> details - these people pods floating along comfortably five feet, or five
> yards, below the surface, or in shallow water just offshore like an extension
> of the boardwalk. Which does indeed minimize or remove many of the categories
> of problems ... but which ALSO doesn't count very well towards either research
> or exploration.)
>
> Dave
>
the OP is about the inability of man to live on Mars,
[due to no air, no water, no food, + high radiation]
the underwater living on Earth has already been done, anyone can google
for it....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-06 18:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <e9iicd-0i7.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #599666 |
In sci.physics David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote: > On 2016-10-06, David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote: >> On 2016-10-05, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> wrote: > >>>> Anyone want to clue him in on the ones OTHER than "there's no AIR there, >>>> dude"? >>> >>> Anyone want to explain how an air pump on the surface works? >> >> Anyone want to explain WHY I invoked "32 feet", up there, to him? It's basic >> physics... which he seems to not have ever encountered. > > -- oh, _I_ see. You're assuming some sort of "perfectly sealed and > strengthened" people pod which has one (1) atmosphere of, well, atmosphere > inside. In which case, sure, I'll grant you an air pump. > > Now... are you envisioning one (1) snorkel-type tube? Are you envisioning it > as compressible? As flexible, and if so, how exactly? And have you taken into > account the effect (cumulative) of ocean currents? > > (Of course, you COULD be envisioning - since you still haven't given any actual > details - these people pods floating along comfortably five feet, or five > yards, below the surface, or in shallow water just offshore like an extension > of the boardwalk. Which does indeed minimize or remove many of the categories > of problems ... but which ALSO doesn't count very well towards either research > or exploration.) > > Dave Nobody meantioned either research or exploration. What was stated was living, which implies a fixed, hardened structure inside of which people are living. Which means there is no reason for the habitat pressure to be other than 1 atmosphere, which means all you need is a fan to move air through a snorkel, which means the snorkel only has to withstand the water pressure. As the pressure decreases with decreased depth. the very top of it could be cloths dryer vent hose. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 15:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nt1c1b$3rh$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #599426 |
In article <reddcd-jhj.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > In sci.physics Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> wrote: > > On Tue, 4 Oct 2016 18:41:18 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > > > >>In sci.physics David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote: > >>> On 2016-10-04, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>> In sci.physics David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote: > >>>>> On 2016-10-03, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> It is difficult to conceive of anything making the Earth more > >>>>>> uninhabitable > >>>>>> than Mars. > >>>>> > >>>>> Parts of the Earth already are, dear. People send scientific and > >>>>> military > >>>>> expeditions there anyway. > >>>> > >>>> Where on the Earth would you have to wear a pressure suit to live more > >>>> than a few seconds and have to have your food, air and water shipped in > >>>> from millions of miles away? > >>> > >>> "On"? No. "Millions"? no, but fairly difficult and time consuming for > >>> each and > >>> every shipment. > >>> > >>> Hint: Arthur Curry was a native. > >> > >>On the surface of the Earth, scifi besotted child. > > > > Arthur Curry is better known as Aquaman. He's talking about under the > > ocean -- which is certainly "parts of the Earth." > > Yes, I know, thus my scifi besotted child comment. > > When rational adult people talk about living somewhere, they are generally > talking about living above ground and above water. > > Assuming someone for some arcane reason wanted to live under water on > Earth, doing so is technically and logistically trivial. Since it's so technically and logistically trivial, I'm sure that means you'll be moving into your new underwater condo sometime in the next few days? If not, I submit that you haven't got a clue as to the realities involved, and are talking out your ass. (Free hint, Jimmy: If it was so trivial, there'd be quite a few extremely crowded places that would be jumping at the chance to ease their population pressure by offloading some of it to underwater habitats. So where are they?) -- Brought to you by the letter K and the number .357 Security provided by Horace S. & Dan W.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-05 00:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <k7tdcd-91l.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #599459 |
In sci.physics Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote: > In article <reddcd-jhj.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > wrote: > >> In sci.physics Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> wrote: >> > On Tue, 4 Oct 2016 18:41:18 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> > >> >>In sci.physics David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> On 2016-10-04, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> >> >>> wrote: >> >>>> In sci.physics David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>>>> On 2016-10-03, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> >> >>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>> It is difficult to conceive of anything making the Earth more >> >>>>>> uninhabitable >> >>>>>> than Mars. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Parts of the Earth already are, dear. People send scientific and >> >>>>> military >> >>>>> expeditions there anyway. >> >>>> >> >>>> Where on the Earth would you have to wear a pressure suit to live more >> >>>> than a few seconds and have to have your food, air and water shipped in >> >>>> from millions of miles away? >> >>> >> >>> "On"? No. "Millions"? no, but fairly difficult and time consuming for >> >>> each and >> >>> every shipment. >> >>> >> >>> Hint: Arthur Curry was a native. >> >> >> >>On the surface of the Earth, scifi besotted child. >> > >> > Arthur Curry is better known as Aquaman. He's talking about under the >> > ocean -- which is certainly "parts of the Earth." >> >> Yes, I know, thus my scifi besotted child comment. >> >> When rational adult people talk about living somewhere, they are generally >> talking about living above ground and above water. >> >> Assuming someone for some arcane reason wanted to live under water on >> Earth, doing so is technically and logistically trivial. > > Since it's so technically and logistically trivial, I'm sure that means > you'll be moving into your new underwater condo sometime in the next few > days? What in your wildest fantasies makes you think I, or anyone else, would want to live under water? If I were to live anywhere in the least bit unusual, it would be in a wilderness area with my own runway. > If not, I submit that you haven't got a clue as to the realities > involved, and are talking out your ass. > > (Free hint, Jimmy: If it was so trivial, there'd be quite a few > extremely crowded places that would be jumping at the chance to ease > their population pressure by offloading some of it to underwater > habitats. So where are they?) Utter horse shit. In extremely crowded places they build tall buildings, as is done in Hong Kong. There is a difference in techically trivial and expensive. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 19:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nt1p4b$s3h$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #599477 |
In article <k7tdcd-91l.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > In sci.physics Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote: > > In article <reddcd-jhj.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > > wrote: > > > >> In sci.physics Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> wrote: > >> > On Tue, 4 Oct 2016 18:41:18 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >> > > >> >>In sci.physics David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote: > >> >>> On 2016-10-04, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>>> In sci.physics David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote: > >> >>>>> On 2016-10-03, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> > >> >>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>> It is difficult to conceive of anything making the Earth more > >> >>>>>> uninhabitable > >> >>>>>> than Mars. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Parts of the Earth already are, dear. People send scientific and > >> >>>>> military > >> >>>>> expeditions there anyway. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Where on the Earth would you have to wear a pressure suit to live > >> >>>> more > >> >>>> than a few seconds and have to have your food, air and water shipped > >> >>>> in > >> >>>> from millions of miles away? > >> >>> > >> >>> "On"? No. "Millions"? no, but fairly difficult and time consuming for > >> >>> each and > >> >>> every shipment. > >> >>> > >> >>> Hint: Arthur Curry was a native. > >> >> > >> >>On the surface of the Earth, scifi besotted child. > >> > > >> > Arthur Curry is better known as Aquaman. He's talking about under the > >> > ocean -- which is certainly "parts of the Earth." > >> > >> Yes, I know, thus my scifi besotted child comment. > >> > >> When rational adult people talk about living somewhere, they are generally > >> talking about living above ground and above water. > >> > >> Assuming someone for some arcane reason wanted to live under water on > >> Earth, doing so is technically and logistically trivial. > > > > Since it's so technically and logistically trivial, I'm sure that means > > you'll be moving into your new underwater condo sometime in the next few > > days? > > What in your wildest fantasies makes you think I, or anyone else, would > want to live under water? > > If I were to live anywhere in the least bit unusual, it would be in > a wilderness area with my own runway. > > > If not, I submit that you haven't got a clue as to the realities > > involved, and are talking out your ass. > > > > (Free hint, Jimmy: If it was so trivial, there'd be quite a few > > extremely crowded places that would be jumping at the chance to ease > > their population pressure by offloading some of it to underwater > > habitats. So where are they?) > > Utter horse shit. > > In extremely crowded places they build tall buildings, as is done > in Hong Kong. > > There is a difference in techically trivial and expensive. ROTFL! Jimmy, first rule of digging yourself into a hole: When you find that's what you're doing, the best thing you can do is STOP DIGGING! You've just gone from mind-bogglingly clueless to utterly laughable! With this post, you actually caused me to LOL at how total your absence of knowledge on the topic you're arguing about is! Thanks! I needed a good knee-slapper! -- Brought to you by the letter K and the number .357 Security provided by Horace S. & Dan W.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-05 05:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sffecd-esm.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #599491 |
In sci.physics Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote: > In article <k7tdcd-91l.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > wrote: > >> In sci.physics Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote: >> > In article <reddcd-jhj.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com >> > wrote: >> > >> >> In sci.physics Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> wrote: >> >> > On Tue, 4 Oct 2016 18:41:18 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >> > >> >> >>In sci.physics David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >> >>> On 2016-10-04, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> >>>> In sci.physics David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >> >>>>> On 2016-10-03, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com <jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com> >> >> >>>>> wrote: >> >> >>>>>> It is difficult to conceive of anything making the Earth more >> >> >>>>>> uninhabitable >> >> >>>>>> than Mars. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Parts of the Earth already are, dear. People send scientific and >> >> >>>>> military >> >> >>>>> expeditions there anyway. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Where on the Earth would you have to wear a pressure suit to live >> >> >>>> more >> >> >>>> than a few seconds and have to have your food, air and water shipped >> >> >>>> in >> >> >>>> from millions of miles away? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> "On"? No. "Millions"? no, but fairly difficult and time consuming for >> >> >>> each and >> >> >>> every shipment. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Hint: Arthur Curry was a native. >> >> >> >> >> >>On the surface of the Earth, scifi besotted child. >> >> > >> >> > Arthur Curry is better known as Aquaman. He's talking about under the >> >> > ocean -- which is certainly "parts of the Earth." >> >> >> >> Yes, I know, thus my scifi besotted child comment. >> >> >> >> When rational adult people talk about living somewhere, they are generally >> >> talking about living above ground and above water. >> >> >> >> Assuming someone for some arcane reason wanted to live under water on >> >> Earth, doing so is technically and logistically trivial. >> > >> > Since it's so technically and logistically trivial, I'm sure that means >> > you'll be moving into your new underwater condo sometime in the next few >> > days? >> >> What in your wildest fantasies makes you think I, or anyone else, would >> want to live under water? >> >> If I were to live anywhere in the least bit unusual, it would be in >> a wilderness area with my own runway. >> >> > If not, I submit that you haven't got a clue as to the realities >> > involved, and are talking out your ass. >> > >> > (Free hint, Jimmy: If it was so trivial, there'd be quite a few >> > extremely crowded places that would be jumping at the chance to ease >> > their population pressure by offloading some of it to underwater >> > habitats. So where are they?) >> >> Utter horse shit. >> >> In extremely crowded places they build tall buildings, as is done >> in Hong Kong. >> >> There is a difference in techically trivial and expensive. > > ROTFL! > > Jimmy, first rule of digging yourself into a hole: When you find that's > what you're doing, the best thing you can do is STOP DIGGING! You've > just gone from mind-bogglingly clueless to utterly laughable! With this > post, you actually caused me to LOL at how total your absence of > knowledge on the topic you're arguing about is! Thanks! I needed a good > knee-slapper! Still nothing but arm waving and ad hominem. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | edprochak@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 11:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c1548fc8-320a-462d-9f30-71caf7581f28@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #599176 |
On Sunday, October 2, 2016 at 9:18:07 PM UTC-4, Cryptoengineer wrote: > Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote in > news:nss4hj$8r6$1@newsreader4.netcologne.de: > > > Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> schrieb: > > > >> They need a coal plant to provide coal and coke for the steel mills. > >> > >> They need mining equipment to mine the iron ore, and water. How do > >> you get a 30 ton truck up on Mars ? order it from Amazon, free > >> shipping ? > >> > >> > >> They need to generate O2, a lot of it. Where are they going to get > >> that ? > > > > If you have enough power (and indeed, this is a big if) you can split > > CO2 into CO and O2 using solid state electrolysis. > > > > http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20120001775.pdf > > > > You can also do this via a multi-stage reaction if you have > > hydrogen (CO2 + H2 <-> CO + H2O). Hydrogen you can get from water > > from electrolysis. Once you've got carbon monoxide and hydrogen > > (syngas), you can start your carbon chemistry chain. > > > > It's doable, but it's hellishly complex. Here, we manage by having > > lots and lots of different chemical companies, making the building > > blocks for each other until a product finally reaches the end > > consumer. > > > > Want an example? Well, on Mars you should be able to build a > > spacesuit with a Polycarbonate bubble. How do you do that? > > > > Well, you start with syngas and make hydrocarbons (you'll need that to > > get the oxygen out). You put those hydrocarbons through a steam > > cracker and/or catalytic reformer to make benzene and propylene. > > Steam crackers are about the biggest and most complex chemical plants > > of them all. Catalytic reformers use platinum or rhenium catalysts, so > > you'd better stock up on these. Well, at least the transport costs > > according to Musk will be low compared to what they cost on Earth, so > > that's OK. > > > > So, we've got benzene and propylene. You make this into cumene using > > phosphoric acid as catalyst (good thing you built up that phosphoric > > acid plant...). Cuemene you oxydize into cumene hydroperoxide in > > an acidic medium (have that NaCl elextrolysis running, right?) to > > give you phenol and acetone. > > > > Throw away half the acetone and make the rest into Bisphenol A, > > using, what... an ion exchange catalyst. Good thing we have that > > plant making acidic ion exchange resins up and running, right? > > For this, we only need styrene, sulfuric acid, a crosslinker and.... > > > > In the next plant, you make up Cl2 and phosgene from it and use this > > and BPA plus NaOH to make your polycarbonate in another interesting > > process using yet another... you just knew it... catalyst. > > Good thing we started manufacturing that before ever starting > > up our Polycarbonate plant. > > > > So now, you've got your first pellet of Polycarbonat to put into... > > what plastics processing machine? > > > > Of course, a spacesuit helmet that yellows and cracks on exposure > > to UV light might not be good on Mars. Did you remember to put > > in those UV absorbers, which are a whole different branch of > > chemistry? Ugh, I'm glad we didn't forget those either. > > > > And all that, just to make a spacesuit bubble from Polycarbonate. > > > > Let's talk about that oil-resistant gasket made from nitrile > > rubber next... > > Thanks. This is something that concerns me. The one that I think > about isn't plastics, it's microprocessors. Modern culture is > deeply dependent on computers, microprocessors, and microcontrollers, > as well as a myriad other chips. > > The underlying minimal infrastructure to build integrated circuits is > vast. > > Can we simplify this? Is there a lower tech level at which a Mars colony > could be self sustaining? One where they can slowly work up their tech > level to higher levels (with full reference to stuff that's already been > done)?. > > They need to maintain atmosphere. > They need to be able to grow food, and obtain water. > They need enough energy to do the above. > > To improve, they need to be able to expand their colony. > To improve, they need to be able to find new resources. > To improve, they need to be able to increase their available energy. > > What's the minimum tech for the first goals? For the secondary goals? > > pt Finally a relevant question. I'll reply with a question about tech level: First does there need to be a high tech industry on Mars? Certainly not for the first few stages of development. The colonists will certainly not need brand new cell phones every two years. Just a few IC machines may be enough to maintain the high tech they need. making the pure silicon may be harder, but energy is the key. The energy question is the big one. I have not seen the solution there yet. Maybe a big nuclear plant on the outskirts of the colony? Maintaining a breathable atmosphere is what you mean. Airlocks are not that hard to make and maintain. Once closed, there is sunlight available. Some of the foodstuffs might come from recycling (think mushrooms, no light needed). I do not think it would take long to get through the first stage. (Assume some kind of mining equipment sent there in the first years.) I'll have to look more into the plans for energy production. Solar cell: doable, but dust prone Solar Concentrator: doable, but also dust prone Nuclear: hard to transport the initial fuel (safety), may need different reactor design if water resources are limited. Others? ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 17:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nsuljp$dol$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #599252 |
On 10/3/2016 1:00 PM, edprochak@gmail.com wrote: > On Sunday, October 2, 2016 at 9:18:07 PM UTC-4, Cryptoengineer wrote: >> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote in >> news:nss4hj$8r6$1@newsreader4.netcologne.de: >> >>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> schrieb: >>> And all that, just to make a spacesuit bubble from Polycarbonate. >>> >>> Let's talk about that oil-resistant gasket made from nitrile >>> rubber next... >> Thanks. This is something that concerns me. The one that I think >> about isn't plastics, it's microprocessors. Modern culture is >> deeply dependent on computers, microprocessors, and microcontrollers, >> as well as a myriad other chips. >> >> The underlying minimal infrastructure to build integrated circuits is >> vast. >> >> Can we simplify this? Is there a lower tech level at which a Mars colony >> could be self sustaining? One where they can slowly work up their tech >> level to higher levels (with full reference to stuff that's already been >> done)?. >> >> They need to maintain atmosphere. >> They need to be able to grow food, and obtain water. >> They need enough energy to do the above. >> >> To improve, they need to be able to expand their colony. >> To improve, they need to be able to find new resources. >> To improve, they need to be able to increase their available energy. >> >> What's the minimum tech for the first goals? For the secondary goals? >> >> pt > > Finally a relevant question. I'll reply with a question > about tech level: > First does there need to be a high tech industry on Mars? > Certainly not for the first few stages of development. > The colonists will certainly not need brand new cell phones every two years. > Just a few IC machines may be enough to maintain the high tech > they need. making the pure silicon may be harder, but energy is the key. > > > The energy question is the big one. I have not seen the solution there yet. > Maybe a big nuclear plant on the outskirts of the colony? > > Maintaining a breathable atmosphere is what you mean. Airlocks are > not that hard to make and maintain. yes they are. > Once closed, there is sunlight available. > Some of the foodstuffs might come from recycling (think mushrooms, no light needed). I do not think it would take long to get through the first stage. > (Assume some kind of mining equipment sent there in the first years.) > > I'll have to look more into the plans for energy production. > > Solar cell: doable, but dust prone > Solar Concentrator: doable, but also dust prone > Nuclear: hard to transport the initial fuel (safety), may need different reactor design if water resources are limited. > Others? > > ed > it is more basic than that, where do you get water and O2 from in vast quantities ? again, there are no real reasons to go to Mars.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 22:07 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nsv6cu$11gs$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #599324 |
On 10/3/2016 5:20 PM, Serigo wrote: > On 10/3/2016 1:00 PM, edprochak@gmail.com wrote: >> On Sunday, October 2, 2016 at 9:18:07 PM UTC-4, Cryptoengineer wrote: >>> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote in >>> news:nss4hj$8r6$1@newsreader4.netcologne.de: >>> >>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> schrieb: > > >>>> And all that, just to make a spacesuit bubble from Polycarbonate. >>>> >>>> Let's talk about that oil-resistant gasket made from nitrile >>>> rubber next... > >>> Thanks. This is something that concerns me. The one that I think >>> about isn't plastics, it's microprocessors. Modern culture is >>> deeply dependent on computers, microprocessors, and microcontrollers, >>> as well as a myriad other chips. >>> >>> The underlying minimal infrastructure to build integrated circuits is >>> vast. >>> >>> Can we simplify this? Is there a lower tech level at which a Mars colony >>> could be self sustaining? One where they can slowly work up their tech >>> level to higher levels (with full reference to stuff that's already been >>> done)?. >>> >>> They need to maintain atmosphere. >>> They need to be able to grow food, and obtain water. >>> They need enough energy to do the above. >>> >>> To improve, they need to be able to expand their colony. >>> To improve, they need to be able to find new resources. >>> To improve, they need to be able to increase their available energy. >>> >>> What's the minimum tech for the first goals? For the secondary goals? >>> >>> pt >> >> Finally a relevant question. I'll reply with a question >> about tech level: > >> First does there need to be a high tech industry on Mars? >> Certainly not for the first few stages of development. >> The colonists will certainly not need brand new cell phones every two >> years. >> Just a few IC machines may be enough to maintain the high tech >> they need. making the pure silicon may be harder, but energy is the key. >> >> >> The energy question is the big one. I have not seen the solution there >> yet. >> Maybe a big nuclear plant on the outskirts of the colony? >> >> Maintaining a breathable atmosphere is what you mean. Airlocks are >> not that hard to make and maintain. > > yes they are. > > >> Once closed, there is sunlight available. >> Some of the foodstuffs might come from recycling (think mushrooms, no >> light needed). I do not think it would take long to get through the >> first stage. >> (Assume some kind of mining equipment sent there in the first years.) what kind of mining equipment runs on O.14 psi CO2 ? and no O2 ? it will have to be electric, with a HUGE stroage battery for pushing dirt. it will take days to charge it...... got solutions ??? >> > >> I'll have to look more into the plans for energy production. >> >> Solar cell: doable, but dust prone >> Solar Concentrator: doable, but also dust prone >> Nuclear: hard to transport the initial fuel (safety), may need >> different reactor design if water resources are limited. >> Others? >> >> ed >> > > it is more basic than that, where do you get water and O2 from in vast > quantities ? > > again, there are no real reasons to go to Mars.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | edprochak@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-06 13:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a9b866e3-05f3-424a-9f09-2a894f5b1578@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #599346 |
On Monday, October 3, 2016 at 11:07:13 PM UTC-4, Serigo wrote: > On 10/3/2016 5:20 PM, Serigo wrote: > > On 10/3/2016 1:00 PM, edprochak@gmail.com wrote: > >> On Sunday, October 2, 2016 at 9:18:07 PM UTC-4, Cryptoengineer wrote: > >>> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote in > >>> news:nss4hj$8r6$1@newsreader4.netcologne.de: > >>> > >>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> schrieb: > > > > > >>>> And all that, just to make a spacesuit bubble from Polycarbonate. > >>>> > >>>> Let's talk about that oil-resistant gasket made from nitrile > >>>> rubber next... > > > >>> Thanks. This is something that concerns me. The one that I think > >>> about isn't plastics, it's microprocessors. Modern culture is > >>> deeply dependent on computers, microprocessors, and microcontrollers, > >>> as well as a myriad other chips. > >>> > >>> The underlying minimal infrastructure to build integrated circuits is > >>> vast. > >>> > >>> Can we simplify this? Is there a lower tech level at which a Mars colony > >>> could be self sustaining? One where they can slowly work up their tech > >>> level to higher levels (with full reference to stuff that's already been > >>> done)?. > >>> > >>> They need to maintain atmosphere. > >>> They need to be able to grow food, and obtain water. > >>> They need enough energy to do the above. > >>> > >>> To improve, they need to be able to expand their colony. > >>> To improve, they need to be able to find new resources. > >>> To improve, they need to be able to increase their available energy. > >>> > >>> What's the minimum tech for the first goals? For the secondary goals? > >>> > >>> pt > >> > >> Finally a relevant question. I'll reply with a question > >> about tech level: > > > >> First does there need to be a high tech industry on Mars? > >> Certainly not for the first few stages of development. > >> The colonists will certainly not need brand new cell phones every two > >> years. > >> Just a few IC machines may be enough to maintain the high tech > >> they need. making the pure silicon may be harder, but energy is the key. > >> > >> > >> The energy question is the big one. I have not seen the solution there > >> yet. > >> Maybe a big nuclear plant on the outskirts of the colony? > >> > >> Maintaining a breathable atmosphere is what you mean. Airlocks are > >> not that hard to make and maintain. > > > > yes they are. > > > > > >> Once closed, there is sunlight available. > >> Some of the foodstuffs might come from recycling (think mushrooms, no > >> light needed). I do not think it would take long to get through the > >> first stage. > >> (Assume some kind of mining equipment sent there in the first years.) > > what kind of mining equipment runs on O.14 psi CO2 ? and no O2 ? > > it will have to be electric, with a HUGE stroage battery for pushing > dirt. it will take days to charge it...... > > got solutions ??? I SAID : VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV > >> I'll have to look more into the plans for energy production. How many times do you have to ask the same question?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-06 21:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <8dricd-5f8.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #599755 |
edprochak@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, October 3, 2016 at 11:07:13 PM UTC-4, Serigo wrote: >> On 10/3/2016 5:20 PM, Serigo wrote: >> > On 10/3/2016 1:00 PM, edprochak@gmail.com wrote: >> >> On Sunday, October 2, 2016 at 9:18:07 PM UTC-4, Cryptoengineer wrote: >> >>> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote in >> >>> news:nss4hj$8r6$1@newsreader4.netcologne.de: >> >>> >> >>>> Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> schrieb: >> > >> > >> >>>> And all that, just to make a spacesuit bubble from Polycarbonate. >> >>>> >> >>>> Let's talk about that oil-resistant gasket made from nitrile >> >>>> rubber next... >> > >> >>> Thanks. This is something that concerns me. The one that I think >> >>> about isn't plastics, it's microprocessors. Modern culture is >> >>> deeply dependent on computers, microprocessors, and microcontrollers, >> >>> as well as a myriad other chips. >> >>> >> >>> The underlying minimal infrastructure to build integrated circuits is >> >>> vast. >> >>> >> >>> Can we simplify this? Is there a lower tech level at which a Mars colony >> >>> could be self sustaining? One where they can slowly work up their tech >> >>> level to higher levels (with full reference to stuff that's already been >> >>> done)?. >> >>> >> >>> They need to maintain atmosphere. >> >>> They need to be able to grow food, and obtain water. >> >>> They need enough energy to do the above. >> >>> >> >>> To improve, they need to be able to expand their colony. >> >>> To improve, they need to be able to find new resources. >> >>> To improve, they need to be able to increase their available energy. >> >>> >> >>> What's the minimum tech for the first goals? For the secondary goals? >> >>> >> >>> pt >> >> >> >> Finally a relevant question. I'll reply with a question >> >> about tech level: >> > >> >> First does there need to be a high tech industry on Mars? >> >> Certainly not for the first few stages of development. >> >> The colonists will certainly not need brand new cell phones every two >> >> years. >> >> Just a few IC machines may be enough to maintain the high tech >> >> they need. making the pure silicon may be harder, but energy is the key. >> >> >> >> >> >> The energy question is the big one. I have not seen the solution there >> >> yet. >> >> Maybe a big nuclear plant on the outskirts of the colony? >> >> >> >> Maintaining a breathable atmosphere is what you mean. Airlocks are >> >> not that hard to make and maintain. >> > >> > yes they are. >> > >> > >> >> Once closed, there is sunlight available. >> >> Some of the foodstuffs might come from recycling (think mushrooms, no >> >> light needed). I do not think it would take long to get through the >> >> first stage. >> >> (Assume some kind of mining equipment sent there in the first years.) >> >> what kind of mining equipment runs on O.14 psi CO2 ? and no O2 ? >> >> it will have to be electric, with a HUGE stroage battery for pushing >> dirt. it will take days to charge it...... >> >> got solutions ??? > > I SAID : VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV >> >> I'll have to look more into the plans for energy production. > > How many times do you have to ask the same question? Likely until you provide a rational answer. The solar irradiance on Mars on average is about half that of Earth when there are no dust storms, and there are lots of dust storms. The only way to provide the enormous amount of power needed to turn dirt and rocks into anything useful can only be supplied by several nuclear reactors. It is to be determined if sufficient water is available on Mars to cool a single nuclear reactor, much less the many that would be needed. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-06 21:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nt70sp$1tt7$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #599760 |
On 10/6/2016 4:13 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > edprochak@gmail.com wrote: >>> > >>> got solutions ??? >> >> I SAID : VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV >>>>> I'll have to look more into the plans for energy production. >> >> How many times do you have to ask the same question? > > Likely until you provide a rational answer. > > The solar irradiance on Mars on average is about half that of Earth > when there are no dust storms, and there are lots of dust storms. > > The only way to provide the enormous amount of power needed to turn > dirt and rocks into anything useful can only be supplied by several > nuclear reactors. > > It is to be determined if sufficient water is available on Mars to > cool a single nuclear reactor, much less the many that would be needed. > Had not thought of that! cooling the reactor !, *HUGE problem* Nuclear reactors are 33% effecient the nuclear power plant Vogtle in Georgia will use 74 MILLION gallons of water a DAY !! http://savannahnow.com/news-latest-news/2014-12-12/nuclear-expansion-gets-ok-drink-deep-savannah-river SO, *we have bounded the Mars colony*, no water no air for humans, nor for COOLing the reactor. Best you could do is 1/5 a megawatt via radiators to space, no capacity in the air either,
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-07 04:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kmmjcd-gab.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #599797 |
Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: > On 10/6/2016 4:13 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> edprochak@gmail.com wrote: >>>> >> >>>> got solutions ??? >>> >>> I SAID : VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV >>>>>> I'll have to look more into the plans for energy production. >>> >>> How many times do you have to ask the same question? >> >> Likely until you provide a rational answer. >> >> The solar irradiance on Mars on average is about half that of Earth >> when there are no dust storms, and there are lots of dust storms. >> >> The only way to provide the enormous amount of power needed to turn >> dirt and rocks into anything useful can only be supplied by several >> nuclear reactors. >> >> It is to be determined if sufficient water is available on Mars to >> cool a single nuclear reactor, much less the many that would be needed. >> > > Had not thought of that! > cooling the reactor !, > > *HUGE problem* > > Nuclear reactors are 33% effecient > > the nuclear power plant Vogtle in Georgia will use 74 MILLION gallons of > water a DAY !! > > http://savannahnow.com/news-latest-news/2014-12-12/nuclear-expansion-gets-ok-drink-deep-savannah-river > > > SO, *we have bounded the Mars colony*, no water no air for humans, nor > for COOLing the reactor. Best you could do is 1/5 a megawatt via > radiators to space, > > no capacity in the air either, This is partially offset by the fact that Mars is cold and it could use a closed loop cooling system instead of full loss. Some of the heat could be used to supply the required heating to cope with the -100F nights. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-07 12:17 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nt8lau$t78$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #599806 |
On 10/6/2016 11:59 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> wrote: >> On 10/6/2016 4:13 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> edprochak@gmail.com wrote: >>>>> >> Had not thought of that! >> cooling the reactor !, >> >> *HUGE problem* >> Nuclear reactors are 33% effecient >> >> the nuclear power plant Vogtle in Georgia will use 74 MILLION gallons of >> water a DAY !! >> >> http://savannahnow.com/news-latest-news/2014-12-12/nuclear-expansion-gets-ok-drink-deep-savannah-river >> >> SO, *we have bounded the Mars colony*, no water no air for humans, nor >> for COOLing the reactor. Best you could do is 1/5 a megawatt via >> radiators to space, >> no capacity in the air either, > > This is partially offset by the fact that Mars is cold and it could > use a closed loop cooling system instead of full loss. > > Some of the heat could be used to supply the required heating to cope > with the -100F nights. > > sounds like an interesting design - partial mass transfer thermal type of problem, [so much mass of air at -100F required], and a thermal radiation problem actually if only 1% of earths atmosphere, the night sky is cold, so radiative transfer may work well there. That is probably why the temp goes to -100F at night anyway. night sky temp on earth is about -25 degree C ? from surface, mostly water vapor.... Mars could have night sky temp -100 C ? or colder, it has some CO2 in the way
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 00:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oh9bcd-afc.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #599252 |
edprochak@gmail.com wrote: <snip> > Finally a relevant question. I'll reply with a question > about tech level: > > First does there need to be a high tech industry on Mars? The original post was about a self sustaining presense, so yes. If all you have is a research outpost, then all you need is constant resupply. > Certainly not for the first few stages of development. > The colonists will certainly not need brand new cell phones every two years. > Just a few IC machines may be enough to maintain the high tech > they need. making the pure silicon may be harder, but energy is the key. Clueless. > The energy question is the big one. I have not seen the solution there yet. > Maybe a big nuclear plant on the outskirts of the colony? A lot of big nuclear plants if you want self sustaining. > Maintaining a breathable atmosphere is what you mean. Airlocks are > not that hard to make and maintain. Once closed, there is sunlight available. > Some of the foodstuffs might come from recycling (think mushrooms, no light needed). I do not think it would take long to get through the first stage. > (Assume some kind of mining equipment sent there in the first years.) Nothing is hard to make and maintain as long as you have the phone number of a good industrial supply store and they deliver. Mushrooms, while tasty, are low in calories and most essential nutrients and only contain vitamin D if exposed to UV. > I'll have to look more into the plans for energy production. > > Solar cell: doable, but dust prone > Solar Concentrator: doable, but also dust prone Solar: a long way from the sun so not much energy there. > Nuclear: hard to transport the initial fuel (safety), may need > different reactor design if water resources are limited. The fuel is but a tiny fraction of what would need to be transported. > Others? Don't exist. The air is too thin to produce substantial amounts of wind power. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 17:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7036e6e4-5a72-4937-96d5-dd7fd1f64be5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #599338 |
There's going to be zero people going to Mars ever, ever, ever.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 21:12 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nsv372$tt9$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #599340 |
On 10/3/2016 7:35 PM, john wrote: > There's going to be zero people > going to Mars ever, ever, ever. > bet there is a cult named "The Zero People" send the zeros to Mars
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web