To Boldly Go

Mars, from Hubble 2005The Journal of Cosmology recently published a proposal (Journal of Cosmology, 2010, Vol 12, 3619-3626.) for the exploration settlement of Mars. This proposal, however, is a little different than most consider when thinking of interplanetary travel.

These missions would be one-way.

Myriad space-exploration resources and money go into making the return-trip possible, and many argue that that cost is too great, financially and politically. The authors of the article, Drs. Dirk Schulze-Makuch and Paul Davies, agree. They say to scrap the return mission.

What they propose is that we (the humans of Earth) send two space crafts to Mars, each with two people on board. Those initial four people would create the infrastructure and conduct science and research for future one-way missions. Prior to this, some robotic exploration would be advised, to deploy power generators, deliver a couple years supply of food, supply agricultural equipment, seek out areas on Mars suitable to shelter human habitation (lava tubes are mentioned), and to research any Martian biota that may exist (primarily to understand what effects it could have on human health, as well as what impact human interference could cause to Martian life).

Future missions would follow, bringing additional tools, supplies, and resources, and additional human inhabitants. They reason that within several decades after the first pioneers land, a possible population of about 150 Mars emigrants would exist. This could constitute a viable gene pool for a permanent reproduction plan on Mars.

Why? I can think of thousands of reasons.

For starters, because the project is technically feasible to begin today. With current technologies and capabilities, a successful mission of this sort is quite feasible. We did it on a nearer scale with the Apollo missions to the Moon, and that was more than 40 years ago. Sure, there are greater challenges related to the distance (about 6 months with current chemical rockets to Mars vs. 3 days it took the Apollo missions to get to the Moon) and environment of Mars compared to the Moon; but again, you can subtract the return portion of the mission from the equation.

Additionally, our species will not survive on Earth forever (super volcanoes, intolerable global warming, asteroid impacts, pandemics, etc.). Mars could function as a lifeboat for human species, and the advances we make in the process could accelerate our ability to become an interstellar race. If the human race is to survive, we simply must travel. [We cannot forget, that within a small handful of billions of years, the Earth will be cremated as the sun converts into a red giant; expanding to a point that the Sun’s equator will possibly exist at a point further than the current orbit of the Earth.]

Aside from utilitarian reasons, exploring and populating new frontiers is part of what makes us human. It’s what we do. We’ve accomplished amazing things in the short history of our species. We’ve conquered the lands, seas, and air. Humans have descended to the deepest depths of our oceans (Jacques Piccard and Lieutenant Don Walsh descended to Challenger Deep in the Marianas Trench, aboard the Bathyscaphe Trieste, in 1960) and climbed the Earth’s highest peaks. We’ve learned to fly and have had an uninterrupted human presence in Earth orbit for more than a decade. We’ve gone as far as putting our species on our nearest natural neighbor, the Moon, on multiple (the last being 38 years ago; Apollo 17) occasions. And while we have explored, and are currently exploring, our solar system, it has always been by proxy. Our probes (Voyager 1 & 2 are still returning data after 33 years, as well as other probes) and rovers (Opportunity is humming along on the Martian surface, and I’m hoping Spirit will eventually wake back up.)

Mars is the next step in the walk of human destiny. If we can’t muster the political will to take that step, then our journey is over and we’ll live out the rest of our existence — a flash in time — on this currently habitable rock. The question we must ask ourselves is whether or not this is good enough.

I’ve spent hours staring at Mars, whether with my eyes, or through the eyepiece of my cheap telescope.

If given the opportunity to participate in one of these missions, I’d sign up; if for nothing else, to have the same view of Earth, behind the eyepiece of a cheap telescope on Mars.

Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed