Kako bivati na drugih planetih

Jz se cist strinjam, da se najprej in najbolj nevarne stvari pocne z roboti.

Sej sm ze reku ,da se je najprej itak pse pa opice posiljal.
Zdej pac robote. Sam smisel pa je, da se pava way za cloveka.

Koncni cilj pa ni, da se robote na pocitnice posilja na druge planete. Roboti so tam da:

1. Zagotovijo podatke op teh oddaljenih krajih
2. Z njimi tudi omogocijo, da se cimprej, cimcenej in cimbolj varno tja poturi cloveka

Vesoljski program je zato, da z njim osvojimo Vesolje. Zdej pošiljat ljudi gor pa podobno, kot prinesti posteljo na zemljišče, kjer bomo jutri začeli kopati gradbeno jamo za hišo.

Neučakano bolj, kot operacija gradnje prenese.

@BW

> Hm, so kje podatki kolk hitro uhaja atomosfera iz Marsa in iz Zemlje?

Podatkov ni, so pa ocene. Zemeljsko magnetno polje ta proces dosti upočasni in zreducira le na najlažje elemente (vodik npr.).


Ocena se nahaja recimo tukaj:

Loss of atmosphere from Mars due to solar wind-induced sputtering.
Kass DM, Yung YL.

Because Mars does not have a strong intrinsic magnetic field, the atmosphere is eroded by interactions with the solar wind. Early solar-system conditions enhanced the sputtering loss. It is calculated that approximately 3 bars of carbon dioxide (CO2) have been sputtered over the last 3.5 billion years. This significant increase over the previous estimate by Luhmann et al. of approximately 0.14 bar of CO2 is the result of the development of a more complete model. The model also predicts slightly greater loss of water--approximately 80 meters instead of the approximately 50 meters predicted by Luhmann et al. Because estimates of CO2 on early Mars range from 0.5 to 5 bars, the 0.14-bar estimate is insignificant but the approximately 3-bar estimate will have a large effect on our understanding of the planet's evolution.

ali pa tukaj:

Mars atmospheric loss and isotopic fractionation by solar-wind-induced sputtering and photochemical escape
Jakosky, Bruce M.; Pepin, Robert O.; Johnson, Robert E.; Fox, J. L.

We examine the effects of the loss of Mars atmospheric constituents by solar-wind-induced sputtering and by photochemical escape during the past 3.8 billion years. Sputtering is capable of efficiently removing species from the upper atmosphere, including the light noble gases; nitrogen and oxygen are removed by photochemical processes as well. Due to diffusive separation (by mass) above the homopause, removal from the top of the atmosphere will fractionate the isotopes of each species, with the lighter mass being preferentially lost. For carbon and oxygen, this allows us to determine the size of nonatmospheric reservoirs which mix with the atmosphere; these reservoirs can be CO2 adsorbed in the regolith and H2O in the polar ice caps. We have constructed both simple analytical models and time-dependent models of the loss of volatiles from and supply to the martian atmosphere. Both argon and neon require continued replenishment from outgassing over geologic time. For argon, sputtering loss explains the fractionation of (Ar-36)/(Ar-38) without requiring a distinct epoch of hydrodynamic escape (although fractionation of Xe isotopes still requires very early hydrodynamic loss). For neon, the current (Ne-22)/(Ne-20) ratio represents a balance between loss to space and continued resupply from the interior; the similarity of the ratio to the terrestrial value is coincidental. For nitrogen, the loss by both sputtering and photochemical escape would produce a fractionation of (N-15)/(N-14) larger than observed; an early, thicker carbon dioxide atmosphere could mitigate the nitrogen loss and produce the observed fractionation, as could continued outgassing of juvenile nitrogen. Based on the isotopic constraints, the total amount of carbon dioxide lost over geologic time is probably on the order of tens of millibars rather than a substantial fraction of a bar. The total loss from solar-wind-induced sputtering and photochemical escape, therefore, does not seem able to explain the loss of a putative thick, early atmosphere withput requiring formation of extensive surface carbonate deposits or other nonatmospheric reservoirs for CO2.

O pošiljanju ljudi v vesolje;

Ste gledali eno oddajo (Odisejada se mi zdi) ko so prikazali kako naj bi zgledal obisk vseh bliznjih planetov naenkrat.

Do tukaj nič spornega- Pač veliko vozilo na jederski pogon, z več pristajalnimi moduli, z elektromagnetnim sčitom (ki jim je pomagal pri zaščiti ko so pospeševali s pomočjo sonca), z umetno gravitacijo (tam so astronavti trenirali),...

Zdaj pa se začne veselje;
kaj so delali;
Na veneri so postavili par merilnih naprav (za kar nerabimo ljudji) in si ogledali staro rusko sondo in se cudili kako da je v tako dobrem stanju (za to pa rabimo ljudi, kajti robotom tako neumna ideja nebi prišla na misel)

Na marsu so nabirali kamenčke in čistili robotke po puščavskih nevihtah, ko jih je zasulo s prahom.
Tukaj so se začele prave komike;
Zatrjevanje nasinih strokovnjakov in pilotov, kako da so astronavti z kladivi najboljsi možni arheologi (kao zelo boljši od robotov) in da roboti na marsu sami nebi imeli možnosti, saj jih puščavske nevihte pokrijejo z prahom in preprečijo dovod fotonov na njihove sončne celice in še dobro da so tam oni da jih popucajo!!!

(jup, lažje kot namestit "brisalec" na sončne celice, raje poslat čistilni servis gor!!)


Nekaj časa sem se režal pred televizorjem, nakoncu pa mi je kapnilo da je to pravzaprav žalostno. Ta nestrokovna manipulacija z navadnimi smrtniki.

Kot vidimo se najde kakšna posledica manipulacije tudi na tem forumu.

PS; S prihodom zasebnega kapitala v vesoljske polete, bodo ljudje leteli gor samo še kot turisti. Raziskovalci bodo samo roboti. A res kdo verjame da bi zasebniki pošiljali astronavte gor, zato da bi jim z lune/marsa/... prinesli spominek (kamen)?

Hja, Caligula res malo prevec navijas, kar se tice bivanja na drugih planetih. To je nekak tako, kot bi nam stalno pravil, kako ugodno se je peljati na strehi avtomobila... sej mas lahk masko ane.

Mi se bomo pa vseeno raje pelali v kabini in vseeno raje razmontirali planete.

Jaz cisto navijam
Kar se tice robotkov in astronavtov-itak, da astronavt lahk ciste stale dela v primerjavi z robotkom.
Robotek je tko kor ce bi lahko prizorisce zlocina ocenil le skozi malo kamerico z omejeno gibljivostjo v primerjavi z posiljanjem pravega forenzika...

Raziskovanje ni serijska proizvodnja.
Sicer pa je kot sem omenil-najboljsa kombinacija obojega.

Si pa predstavljas kako bi bil beden filing, ce bi mi tukaj nasli neko sondo od marsovcev, ki bi bili milijarde km stran,.. namesto nih samih na obisku?

Astronomija je nkaj drugega. Clovek itak nima prilagojenega vida za iskanje odaljenih objektov pa tudi intuicija tam nima nic zraven.
Ne mi zdaj mesat cisto neprimerljivih podrocij.

Ko pa clovek lahko nekaj v real timu prime v roke, obraca, primerja, ... je pa to malo drugace.
PA to ne govorim ,da je to zamenjava za robote. Samo roboti niso zamenjava za to.

To sta dve komplementarni zadevi.

Nepotrebna človeška osvajanja (beri: turizem) vesolja naj se financirajo iz privatnega kapitala. Preprečiti jim ne moreš, saj so tudi v batiskafe radi potiskali ljudi.

Sicer pa welcome back Double J, sem kar pogrešal tvoje poste :-)