The Reasoning Behind the Current Interest in the Colonization of Mars

Transcription

1 Jensen 1 Kasey Jensen Professor Roudabush UNIV April 2015 The Reasoning Behind the Current Interest in the Colonization of Mars It took humans thousands of years to successfully create the technology to get off of the ground for a few seconds and only sixty six short years after that for us to land on the Moon. In the years since that first Moon landing, satellites and probes have explored our solar system extensively and have even landed on other planets. Our understanding of the universe around us is growing quickly and does not appear to be slowing any time soon. The only extraterrestrial body people have stepped foot on is the Moon, but with continuing advancements and natural born human curiosity, this could soon change. The planet that currently has the most interest in it for manned missions is Mars. Not only is it the focus for human visits, it s also the focus of the best place for the first space colony. There are many reasons why space colonization is becoming such a popular idea, ranging from advanced scientific ones to just simply wanting to see what would happen. But it goes beyond just a growing interest in space colonization; almost all of the focus for where a settlement should be is on Mars. Every planet and satellite in the solar system has vastly different characteristics, which means there s nowhere for humans to live that would be identical to Earth. Because of this, even though Mars doesn t seem to be anything like Earth, it most likely is the best option for an outer space settlement. Having a colony on another planet is necessary because of the improvements it would bring, the fact it is the only way to potentially prevent extinction of the human race, and the scientific discoveries that could be made, and Mars is the best location for that to happen.

2 Jensen 2 Pollution and the resulting climate change is arguable the top global issue we are facing on Earth today. Although climate change and the sources of it is a controversial issue, there is no denying that there is a rapid change in the temperatures of the globe and that the changes have and continue to directly affect human cultures, societies, and life (Barker). This same situation could happen on another planet, which means that cleaner energy sources must be used for those colonies. Not only will the energy sources need to be nonpolluting, but they will also have to be renewable since any outpost in space is going to need to be completely self sufficient because of how long it would take to travel between Mars and Earth. One thing that is absolutely crucial for survival is having some kind of energy source. Without a source of energy, it would be impossible to create anything or grow any food. The American Institute of Physics has explained that successful space colonization requires abundant energy that is both low-cost and nonpolluting. Currently on Earth, this kind of energy isn t as common as its nonrenewable counterparts, but that doesn t mean that we don t have the ability to create it. Scientists have shown that currently the technology is available for nonpolluting abundant energy sources (Jaggard). While they are not currently as low cost as other energy sources, this does not necessarily make them expensive, and the cost is continuing to decrease. So the nonpolluting abundant energy does exist now, but it is not necessarily classified as being low-cost. However, the benefits of utilizing these resources and making better energy sources cheaper are plenty, both when applied to space colonization and Earth itself. Even if we do not attempt to colonize space, improved energy sources are still necessary for human survival, so putting resources towards this would never be a waste. The creation of a low-cost energy source for a space colony can then be applied to Earth and can help solve the pollution problem.

3 Jensen 3 There are plenty of issues that still require attention here on Earth. In addition to pollution, disease and inadequate amounts of food and water are just some examples of global issues that have yet to be solved. Because the Earth is still plagued with these problems, there are arguments against using resources for space colonization. It could be reasoned that creating these programs would only cause more problems, but they could actually create solutions. A Global Foresight Workshop was convened by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in 2002 with key national and international organizations and agencies. These organizations were asked what goals they have for the world as far as improvement goes. The top five goals established included providing clean food and water, clean and abundant energy, and universal health care, as well as eliminating all major diseases and ending slavery globally (Siegfried). The best course of action would be one that helps solve these major problems, and investing in space colonization is the surprising solution. Every person on Earth is affected by these issues in one way or another, which is why it s so important to solve them, and putting resources towards creating technology for space travel and settlements can help with this. The American Institute of Physics (AIP) held a conference discussing space colonization and the benefits for the world that would come from it. These five goals of highest global importance were brought up at this conference and it was explained by the AIP that Space Colonization can help lead to solutions to these goals (Siegfried). This is because many of the things that are necessary for space colonization to be successful can be applied to these issues. Not only is new and better technology going to be created, but by having a new settlement it creates the opportunity for trial and error. On Earth it is more difficult to implicate new policies and technologies because of the massive scale that it would be on and also because it is challenging to get people to change their ways. While it is good that we may be able to

4 Jensen 4 create solutions to combat the negative effects of pollution and depleting energy sources, but there are additional problems on Earth that are out of our hands and require expanding into space. If pollution was the only problem Earth is facing right now, then solutions could be found that would allow us to continue only living on Earth, but it is not. The state of our habitat here on Earth is quickly getting worse and we can only live on this planet for so many more years before it becomes uninhabitable and the human race goes extinct. Stephen Hawking, one of the world s most brilliant minds, once said I don t think the human race will survive the next thousand years, unless we spread into space. There are too many accidents that can befall life on a single planet. and he s not the only one to believe this. Others include Buzz Aldrin, Neil degrasse Tyson, and Bill Nye. So why do some of the most intelligent people have such a drastic and morbid opinion on our survival? It is because of a multitude of catastrophic threats span[ning] all social scales, from global to national to regional that are getting increasingly worse (Barker). Natural disasters, such as an asteroid impact or volcanic eruption, and disease are situations that we as humans cannot control completely. It is proven that a species survivability is closely related to the extent of its range, meaning that the more area a species populates, the longer that species will likely survive for (Hecht). Using this logic, expanding our habitat to an additional planet would greatly increase the likelihood of our survival. A mass wipeout of species on Earth hasn t occurred since an asteroid crashed into Earth 65 million years and killed over seventy-five percent of all species, but that large passing of time does not mean that Earth isn t still at risk for it to happen again (Barker). In fact, we already are investing in countermeasures to this. NASA spends $4 million per year monitoring near-earth asteroids and comets, so clearly it is a real issue that could occur and is taken seriously (Matheny). Even though humans are much more advanced than any species alive

5 Jensen 5 millions of years ago, we still have no defense against an event like this. In order to avoid the fate of extinction, human life must exists off of Earth, and Mars is the best chance we have of this happening. Naturally occurring disasters, however, are not the biggest threat to humanity. While it is possible for humans to survive a million years or more...we could succumb to extinction as soon as this century (Matheny). The biggest reason behind this possibility of a short future is the human race itself. Humans have been at war since the beginning of time, and in recent centuries it is becoming easier to use deadly force and it is also becoming exponentially more effective. One of the largest threats to humanity s future is widespread death caused by nuclear warfare and other methods of terrorist attacks. As seen with the Holocaust during World War I, U.S. s bombing of Japan during World War II, and to a lesser extent the attacks of 9/11, human beings are not afraid to end the lives of their own kind. In the mid to late twentieth century it was the beginning and height of the nuclear weapons era. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, President Kennedy estimated the probability of a nuclear holocaust as somewhere between one out of three and even and in 1996 the Chairman of the U.S. Air Force Strategic Missiles Evaluation Committee, John von Neumann, predicted that it was absolutely certain that there would be a nuclear war and that everyone would die in it (Matheny). The more current predictions on the subject have more hope for humanity, with Britain s Astronomer Royal Sir Martin Rees giving odds on surviving the 21st century (Matheny). While these statistics are getting better over time, it could very easily turn around quickly because of always evolving conflicts and new technology that could prove to be even more deadly. Nuclear warfare is no longer the front-runner as far as threats to the human race go; it s been replaced by something even more terrifying- bioterrorism. Bioterrorism is the act of using viruses or diseases to attack a group of people instead of direct violence, and is the most severe...current extinction risk (Matheny). The most well known example of a bioterrorism agent is

6 Jensen 6 Anthrax and the attacks it was used for in 2001 that left five people dead ( Timeline ). What makes bioterrorism agents even more deadly is that it is nearly impossible to confine them to only affect a certain area or kind of people, which means when they are used as a weapon, it is inevitable that more people will be killed than what is intended. There is also the ever present threat of an accident happening and an unintentional creation of a pandemic, which could in an extreme case cause the complete wipeout of humans, along with dozens of other species. A way to combat this threat of death would be to have human life in a location that couldn t be affected, and the only way for this to happen would be if we inhabited a place completely separate from Earth. Even with treaties and programs implemented between countries, conflict still occurs and will always arise. Because of this unfortunate situation, there is an ever present risk that something like nuclear warfare or bioterrorism could occur at anytime, and the only way to protect ourselves from being wiped out by it would be to have a permanent settlement off of the planet Earth. Of course the more life-threatening reasons for colonization are the most important motives, but there are also other reasons that are not as negative and are still compelling. Most scientific discoveries stem from simple curiosity and the desire to understand our surroundings. Space is considered the final frontier as far as discoveries go, and there is so much we don t know about it yet. Currently, Earth is the only planet that has intelligent life on it right now that we know of, but discoveries on Mars could change that. Not only could we learn more about other planets and the universe, but going to Mars could also help us gain knowledge about Earth as well. We have evidence that we are changing the Earth s atmosphere and environment in significant ways ( Gruenwald ). Being able to see what changes and issues are occurring with Earth from above can help with monitoring and understanding what s going on. This new knowledge can help with preserving and bettering life on Earth. Colonizing Mars would also

7 Jensen 7 require huge improvements in technology, and these improved technologies can be applied to other aspects of life on Earth. One of the best examples of what this improvement may be like is the Hubble Space Telescope. During its first couple years in space, it only took blurry pictures due to a flaw in its engineering. A computer algorithm was developed to better extract information from these images, and this algorithm was eventually shared with a medical doctor, who then applied it to the X-ray images he was taking to detect breast cancer (Orwig). The algorithm made huge improvements in detecting early stages of breast cancer, and is just one example of an advancement for one scientific field being applied to another and bettering current understandings. There are arguments that state that as far as discoveries go, robots could do the job and sending humans is not the best choice, but this is incorrect because of some key differences between what robots and people can accomplish on the surface of Mars. Robots have probed Mars and made plenty of discoveries about the planet that way, but there s only so much that can be discovered by machines. Focus should be on sending humans to Mars instead of robots because humans can make discoveries 10,000 times as fast as the best spacecraft explorers we have today (Orwig). A search for fossils on the Martian surface or microbes in groundwater below could provide previously undiscovered information about both Mars and the universe as a whole ( Gruenwald ). With robots, in order for discoveries to made, the focus has to be on sample return. Since the robots themselves can t actually analyze the samples, the materials have to be sent back to Earth. The idea of sending a mission to go to Mars and return a sample is a lot like sending a crew to Mars and returning them safely, meaning that if the effort is going to be put into sending something to Mars and back, why only send robots if sending human beings could achieve so much more for not that large of a difference (David). Colonizing Mars goes way beyond a simple mission to and back, and while that seems like something that would be

8 Jensen 8 comparatively much more difficult, it would be worth it to go to that next level. Experts like astrobiologist Dirk Schulze-Makuch disagree with the high priority on sample return because the in-situ [on-the-spot] capabilities are so much better nowadays, which means results could be found while still on Mars (David). Not only would it cut out the months of transit it takes to travel between Mars and Earth if samples could be processed on Mars, it would also eliminate the chance of the samples getting lost in transit or contaminated in any way. Additionally, sample return missions are so much more costly than in-situ missions (David). Not only would results from humans staying on Mars be better than those found by robots travelling back and forth to Earth, it would actually be more cost effective as far as the direct costs of finding results goes. Another difference between a robotic and human mission is the level of mobility that could be achieved. One of the most important things when it comes to collecting samples on the surface of Mars is the ability to get multiple perspectives to establish detailed geologic context, which means that mobility...is a pre-requisite (David). Experiments have already been done on Earth to see if a human with boots could achieve satisfactory mobility and the results prove that it could. As far as autonomous robots go, however, geologists like Kip Hodges, the director of the School of Earth and Space Exploration, are unconvinced that they would be able to achieve the same level of mobility as humans anytime soon (David). Robots are helpful and how we have discovered that Mars would be the most suitable place for a colony, but to continue discoveries it is necessary for humans to travel there as well. There are so many planets and satellites to choose where to start a space colony but Mars is the best option. At first glance, Mars seems to be far from the ideal place to attempt the first space colony, but in reality it s the best option. It is the closest planet to Earth and surprisingly has a lot in common with Earth. The only extraterrestrial body closer to Earth than Mars is the Moon, which for many

9 Jensen 9 reasons is not as good of a choice for colonization as Mars. Unlike Earth and Mars, the Moon has no atmosphere, which means that the type and quantity of rocket fuel used to launch rockets from the surface is much different than that needed for Earth or Mars ( Society ). In order for Mars to be a sustainable colony and to help decrease the risks involved, the ability to make rocket fuel on Mars is extremely helpful. Because of the Moon s lack of atmosphere, this task would be much more difficult there, if not impossible. Another reason why the Moon is too different from Earth is that the temperatures on it vary wildly. According to the Mars Society, the temperature of the surface of the Moon averages 212F, while temperatures on Mars tend to fluctuate from roughly -130F to 50F (Zubrin). While those extremely low negative temperatures on Mars are not pleasant, that range is much more livable than a constant unbearable high temperature. It is possible to build structures and equipment to counteract low temperatures, but for incredibly high temperature it is much more difficult if it is even feasible. A way that Mars is almost identical to Earth is that it has a hour day, while the Moon has a 672 hour day (Zubrin). This similarity will not only help make it easier to adapt to the change technology wise, but also for humans themselves. A similar length of a day means that the way the sun rises and sets and sunlight changes will be easy to adjust to, if there even is any difference at all. Not only are the basic characteristics like those mentioned previously of Mars the most similar to those of Earth, what is physically on Mars is also why it is the best option for colonization. Something that is important to consider when choosing where to expand a space colony is what kind of materials are already available for use there. The more metals and elements that are abundant on a planet, the less materials have to be transported to it from Earth. Mars is rich in carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen, and oxygen that are all in biologically readily accessible forms, which means that it would not take great lengths to retrieve them for use (Zubrin). The Moon is deficient in all of these, as well as

10 Jensen 10 about half the metals of interest to industrial society, which includes crucial metals, like copper (Zubrin). Mars has every required metal and element in abundance for creating a sustainable settlement on it. One of the most important characteristics a planet needs that is crucial for sustainable human life is water, and this is a characteristic that sets Mars apart from all other extraterrestrial bodies. Besides Earth, Mars is one of the very few places within our solar system that has water on it. The others are dwarf planets so much farther away from Earth that it would just simply be too difficult to reach them any time soon, even with the advancements being made in technology. Mars being the only relatively close place with water on it is one of the biggest reasons why it is the best location to attempt a space colony. There is the possibility that water does exist on the Moon, but if it does it has yet to be discovered and would require considerably more effort to obtain ( Society ). Since Mars is the easiest planet with water confirmed on it to access, it is the best choice when determining what extraterrestrial body to create a settlement on. Colonizing Mars is the next necessary step in exploration and expansion for humankind. There are ways we can reduce risks and discover new things that can only be achieved on an extraterrestrial body. We have the chance to create advanced new technologies that would support life on Mars and also enhance life here on Earth. The technologies could be applied to problems on Earth, like pollution, or transformed to change how we solve problems in fields like medicine. However, as beneficial as new technology would be for life on Earth, if we don t inhabit another planet soon then these benefits won t really matter. There is no uncertainty about it; it is only a matter of time before something causes the human race to cease to exist. Whether it be from a natural disaster or an act of extreme bioterrorism or any of the other possibilities, at some point something will eliminate humans from the Earth. The only way we can attempt to ensure the survival of humans for future generations is by establishing a

11 Jensen 11 settlement off of Earth. Mars is the closest planet to Earth, has the most similar length of day, and is one of very few extraterrestrial bodies to have water on it, so clearly it is the best option for this colony. We must continue to explore our universe, and establishing a colony on Mars is the next course of action for this.

12 Jensen 12 Works Cited Barker, Donald. "The Mars Imperative: Species Survival and Inspiring a Globalized Culture." Acta Astronautica. ScienceDirect, Feb.-Mar Web. 28 Feb David, Leonard. "Future Mars Missions: Can Humans Trump Robots? Mars Sample Return Space.com." Space Insider. Purch, 02 Nov Web. 20 Apr Gruenwald, J. "Human Outposts on Mars: Engineering and Scientific Lessons Learned from History." SpringerLink. SpringerLink, 17 Jan Web. 15 Mar Jaggard, Victoria. "How to Build a Mars Colony That Lasts." New Scientist. New Scientist, 18 May Web. 12 Mar Kozicka, J. "Low-cost Solutions for Martian Base." Science Direct. ScienceDirect, Jan Web. 8 Mar Orwig, Jessica. "5 Undeniable Reasons Humans Need to Colonize Mars - Even Though It's Going to Cost Billions." Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 21 Apr Web. 25 Apr Siegfield, W. H. "Space Colonization-Benefits for the World." AIP Conference. Proc. of American Institute of Physics Conference, California, Huntington Beach. AIP Publishing, Web. 22 Mar Smith, Cameron M. "Starship Humanity." Scientific American. Scientific American, Jan Web. 12 Mar "Society FAQ." Society FAQ - The Mars Society. The Mars Society, Web. 15 Mar "Timeline: How The Anthrax Terror Unfolded." NPR. NPR, 15 Feb Web. 20 Apr Zeitlin, C. "How Much Radiation Will the Settlers Be Exposed To? - Health and Ethics - Mars One." Mars One. Mars One, 31 May Web. 15 Mar