Is it really necessary to send humans to those places just to get the knock-on benefits? Couldn’t we do those things directly, without going there?
It seems to me that, today, those who have the money to spend on these endeavors would only do so if there were perceived short-term benefits to themselves. That means they plan to exploit the resources, or increase their own power somehow.
I know the good engineers that make this happen are doing it for the challenge and in the pursuit of knowledge, and I know that’s why we poors support it, but that doesn’t “pay the bills.” What is the motivation behind the money? Why are they really doing this?
yeah the cosmic radiation on the trip is gonna be… rough.
can be ameliorated with shielding, and if you’re going to mars you’re gonna wanna cart along a shitton of water (can be used for fuel or oxygen or drinking) so that may work out…
decreasing the transit time is critical, so constant thrust engines like NERVA can cut the risk down by making the trip faster…
but the why remains most for me: why do we feel putting humans on mars is worth it? the risks are manifold:
contaminating mars with more earth stuff, and now with human gut biome (astronauts will poop, and they ain’t bringing it all home)
one nasty solar flare and you run the risk of ending the mission right there - shielding be damned, a nasty one could cook all kinds of important tech.
the cost is astronomical (badum-tss) and the return - ? fuzzy at the very best. we’re NEVER going to terraform mars in the next couple hundred years, and terrestrial life would need all the perchlorates scrubbed from everything, all for what - maybe a week running around taking pictures and digging around in soils already sampled by rovers that are still running? and your point it’s got no magnetosphere so you’d live in a lava tube? pfft… why? we can live in lava tubes on the moon lol.
I just don’t see any why that justifies it.
Moon has utility, mars is a waste of time and resources imho.