MarsBlog.net

I’m doing some reading in Indian history as part of my research for the sequel to In the Shadow of Ares. In John Keay’s India: A History, I came across this interesting passage in his discussion of the ‘epic age’ of the Mahabharata and Ramayana:

As for the retreat into exile, the other central theme in both epics, this is taken to indicate the process by which clan society resolved its conflicts and at the same time encroached ever deeper into the subcontinent. Eventually population pressures on land and other resources would encourage greater social specialisation and he assertion of a central authority, two of the prerequisites of a state. But during the first centuries of the first millennium BC, these same pressures seem merely to have encouraged a traditional solution whereby clans segmented and split away to explore new territories. [emphasis added]

In the context of the chapter, he is taking a common thread of the two epics (the exile in the wilderness of their respective protagonists) as a hint as to how the ?r?an colonists gradually spread to the east and south from the Indus Valley.

What struck me as interesting is that much the same thing could happen with space settlement, especially given some TBD mode of practical interstellar travel.

In the near term (say, the next 100 years), if efforts to commercialize space access pan out and we begin building colonies in space, on the Moon, and on Mars, we will have established a new “wilderness” in the sense Keay describes elsewhere in the chapter: an untamed space where danger may lurk away from the safety of established civilization, but where the freedom exists to build afresh. The process of settlement and ongoing development will due to resource and labor shortages limit the degree to which a central authority can be asserted, providing a breathing space for innovation between the continuously expanding frontier and the expanding boundary of civilization trailing behind it. Political or social conflicts unresolvable in the civilized regions can be defused through one or another party choosing to escape to the freedom of this breathing space or the wilderness beyond, thereby pushing the frontier further outward — versus being kept bottled up in a finite arena where the intractability of the disagreements and the inescapable proximity of the conflicting parties can foster discontent, unrest, and violence lasting generations.

In practice, this might mean expanding to lunar colonies as near-Earth orbital habitats become too regulated or restricted by Earth governments or international treaties. On the Moon, disaffected individuals or groups frustrated with their circumstances in an existing settlement might decide to start their own settlements on or beyond the fringes of areas already settled or explored. As the lunar frontier ‘closes’ due to Keay’s “social specialization and assertion of central authority”, similarly frustrated settlers might decide to try their fortunes on the martian frontier, then among the asteroids, and so on through increasingly less-desirable properties.

It’s not like this hasn’t happened already, in our own history. The story of the Plymouth Rock Pilgrims, the Mormon migrations to Utah, and the “Go west, young man” ethos of the Old West were clearly manifestations of this same concept.

In the longer term, given some means of practical interstellar travel, this process of expansion-by-exile into the wilderness could happen on a vastly larger scale. If this turns out to be true, the ‘wilderness’ becomes effectively infinite.

Of course, this depends on a conservative view that we will continue to be recognizably human over such long time scales, as the development of new frontiers will likely result in an acceleration of technological innovation – including ‘transhuman’ technology like cognitive enhancements, targeted genetic improvements, or even ‘uploading’ into non-biological (or who knows, even non-physical) forms. What makes the expansion-by-exile concept useful for science fiction is that it can avoid the trap of having to tell a story from the difficult-to-conceive perspective of these transhumans by giving an author the choice among worlds on a spectrum of development — after all, given the Amish as a present-day example, it’s not difficult to imagine that some of those irreconcilable differences that might drive settlers into exile in the wilderness would concern the adoption of certain transhuman technologies, resulting in worlds (whether at the center or the periphery of civilization) whose inhabitants are still relatably human.

Posted on January 20th, 2012 under In the Shadow of Ares, Indian Space, Science Fiction, Settlement, Writing. Comments Off

This could certainly be useful in martian and lunar settlements, and perhaps moreso on the way to and from them – Researchers successfully treat previously lethal doses of radiation:

“The fact that this treatment can be administered up to a day after radiation exposure is so important,” said Millie Donlon, DARPA’s program manager for this effort. “This is because most of the existing treatments we have require they be administered within hours of exposure to potentially lethal radiation – something that might not always be possible in the confusion that would likely follow such an exposure event.”

The treatment – a combination of two readily-available and stockpileable pharmaceuticals – increases in mice the survival rate from a normally lethal dose to 80%, and there are indications it could be even more effective in humans. Note that it appears to treat only the immediate effects (“radiation sickness”) and there’s no mention of whether it reduces rates of long-term medical problems stemming from the exposure, such as cancers. Of course, one mustn’t be too greedy — I’m sure someone exposed to a lethal dose of radiation would consider the potential for cancer later in life an okay tradeoff to not dying a rapid and horrible death.

What might come of this discovery, if it does work as indicated?

• Long-term space activities outside LEO (including transportation to and from deep space destinations) might be perceived as less risky if solar flares or other high-exposure events are less of a problem;
• Spacecraft, stations, and surface facilities could be made simpler and lighter – if it’s accurate to consider this treatment as effectively raising the lethal dose (and again ignoring the long-term consequences in favor of short-term survival), structural countermeasures for extreme events don’t need to block quite as much radiation, and lighter or larger “storm cellars” become possible;
• Nuclear power accidents become less hysteria-inducing (but then so might nuclear weapons use – c.f. Michael F. Flynn’s The Washer at the Ford)

Interesting.

Apparently, Resveratrol also has some anti-rad properties.

Posted on January 7th, 2012 under Science & Engineering, Settlement, Space Technology, Useful Technology. Tags: cancer, medicine, radiation, treatment. Comments Off

An interesting project at the South Pole, involving agriculture in a controlled (and in this case, sunless and soil-less) environment: To the moon…South Pole greenhouse model for growing freshies on other worlds

Crops of lettuce, kale, cucumber, peppers, herbs, tomatoes, cantaloupes and edible flowers comprise many of the plants grown in the climate-controlled chamber. Because the importation of soil is restricted by the Antarctic Treaty , dirt is not used to grow the plants. In fact, the closest local dirt is nearly two miles beneath the ice on which the station sits. The plants are grown in a hydroponic nutrient solution instead — no dirt needed.

For that matter, no sunlight is needed either. The growth chamber, which was built in the winter of 2004, makes its own light via 13 water-cooled, high-pressure sodium lamps. In this bright environment, it is not uncommon to find people, like the plants, dwelling happily under the intense light produced in the chamber during the dark polar winter.

Carl and I put a lot of thought into extraterrestrial agriculture while writing In the Shadow of Ares, not least because the primary setting for the book is a very large agricultural settlement. Interestingly (or perhaps not surprisingly), we came to some of the same conclusions as these researchers. Of particular note, the morale benefit to settlers in an inescapably indoor environment of having an open green space (or Greenspace, if you’ve read the book).

Posted on March 11th, 2011 under In the Shadow of Ares, Science & Engineering, Science Fiction, Settlement, Space Technology, Useful Technology, Writing. Tags: agriculture, antarctica, Economics, food, In the Shadow of Ares, mars, moon, Settlement. Comments Off

“In the Shadow of Ares” (formerly known around here as “Labyrinth of Night”) is now available for download at Amazon.com:

In 2029, the third exploration mission to Mars vanishes without a trace. Two decades later, the success of human settlement of Mars and the life of a young girl hinge on the secret of what happened to the Ares III mission.

---

Twenty years later, Mars is a growing outpost of humanity, and 14-year-old settler Amber Jacobsen is a minor interplanetary celebrity – ‘the First Kid on Mars’.  Pioneering Mars is hard, unglamorous work, though, and Amber secretly wishes she were just an ordinary girl living on Earth.

When her family’s homestead is destroyed in an apparent accident, the Jacobsens relocate to an independent settlement located on the northern fringes of Noctis Labyrinthus, a vast and largely unexplored canyonland.  Their new home promises new opportunities, and Amber looks forward to being just another member of the community. Instead, the other settlers dismiss her as a burdensome child and refuse to accept her as the responsible young adult she has become.

In order to prove the value of her unique knowledge and perspective, Amber vows to uncover the fate of the Ares III mission, whose loss had largely been forgotten in the rush of the Martian settlement boom.  But this seemingly harmless challenge thrusts her into a deadly conflict: those who know the truth will kill to keep it hidden, while those who destroyed her family’s homestead would use the secret to secure their dominance over all of Mars.

In solving the mystery, Amber could destroy everything the Martian settlers have worked to create.

It’s priced at an affordable $6.99, and would make a wonderful Christmas present for the science fiction reader or young adult on your shopping list. Especially if you’re buying them a Kindle or they already own one (remember, you can also download the free Kindle app for various electronic platforms if you/they don’t have a Kindle reader).

While I’m going to be occupied for much of the weekend with writing a business plan and attending Christmas parties, I do expect to get the blog at AresProject.com up and running again in the next few days. We will use that forum to discuss the book, the backstory, etc.

Posted on December 10th, 2010 under Economics, Entertainment, In the Shadow of Ares, politics, Science Fiction, Settlement, Space Commerce, Writing. Tags: Amber Jacobsen, Ares Project, ebook, In the Shadow of Ares, In the Shadow of Ares, kindle. Comments: 7

The University of Arizona has posted an interesting new batch of images from HiRISE, taken between July 8-31 this year. Wired, in its writeup on the Mars image collection, includes a sample image that looks sorta…familiar…

These volcanic cones were formed by hot lava running over water or ice. The heat from the lava boiled the water underneath, and the water burst upwards in an exploding bubble of lava. The explosion threw chunks of molten and solid lava into the air to gather into the cones. These cones are similar in size and shape to cones found in Iceland.

Probably because last month I saw some of the craters in Iceland referred to in the Wired article:

It’s a little hard to appreciate them from this angle – short of renting a plane or climbing the Gibraltar-like pinnacle in the middle of the lake, there wasn’t a good vantage point from which to capture on film the features you could see with your eyes (well, okay, there sorta was, but I didn’t have my long zoom lens on the trip).

As I recall, the Mars Society was at one time considering establishing one of their analogue stations in Iceland. One could certainly choose far less Mars-similar locations…

[via Instapundit]

Posted on September 3rd, 2010 under Settlement, Space Science. Tags: HiRISE, Iceland, mars, Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, MRO, wired. Comments Off

The clouds and greenery (such as it is) distract from the impression here, but the geothermal taps at Krafla struck me as looking a lot like the infrastructure one might expect to see near a settlement on the Moon or Mars. The offworld resemblance wasn’t only in the incompletely-terraformed appearance of the landscape.

Posted on August 26th, 2010 under Entertainment, Settlement, Space Technology. Tags: Iceland, industry, Krafla, mars, moon, Science Fiction, Settlement. Comments Off

A slightly-marsified version of one of my Iceland pics, from the wastelands near Emstrur.

It was easy to see why NASA sent Apollo astronauts to train here.

Posted on August 18th, 2010 under Entertainment, Meta, Settlement, Space Science. Tags: Iceland, lander, mars, moon, Opportunity, phoenix, photography, rover, spirit. Comments Off

Finally getting the time to post more of my Iceland pictures on Flickr. Aside from the clouds and the sparse moss, one could picture a vista like this on Mars:

As I upload the pictures, I’m also adding any especially un-Earth-like shots to a separate set which I will publish here later. The set will include some shots I got of various geothermal installations, which (like the landscapes) look an awful lot like what I would expect some of the industrial parts of a Mars settlement to look like.

Posted on August 15th, 2010 under Entertainment, Settlement, Space Technology. Tags: analogue, Iceland, landscape, mars, moon, terrain. Comments Off

Having just spent three weeks in close quarters in a Mars-like environment, this survey on attitudes towards Mars settlement conditions from Jon Goff (who I may actually meet in person this week) seems well-timed.

My answers to the primary questions:

1. Would you be willing to make a one way trip to Mars if it meant leaving behind wife and children?
   Doubtful, unless there was a strong expectation that they (or at least she, if the kids were grown or nearly so) could join me at some later date. I don’t see how a super-long-distance relationship like that could be made to work out if the separation were permanent.
2. Would you be willing to make a one way trip to Mars if it meant working 16 hours a day, 7 days a week? 12 hours? 8 hours?
   I think it depends on the nature of the work. Continual 8hr days are not that difficult to envision for most types of work I could see myself doing. For 12hr shifts, it would only be sustainable over the long term if there was some variety to the tasks, some mixture of hand work and mind work versus fully one or the other type. While I would be willing to do occasional or even frequent 16hr shifts, I can’t imagine any mixture of tasks making such long shifts sustainable for me over long periods of time. However, breaking a shift into shorter blocks separated by breaks would make the longer overall shifts a bit more workable, by helping to forestall fatigue, boredom, and inattentiveness.
   It also depends on how long the 7-day schedule is maintained. If I was expected to work every day, a longer shift would make it far less appealing and less sustainable. Even with the 8hr shift, the expectation of working every day of the week indefinitely would be unpalatable. What could help make these hours more palatable is an overtime premium on pay, some sort of tangible/financial reward earned for working longer shifts.
   Based on experience, I know that I can work regular nine-hour weekdays, plus a weekday or two of up to 12 hours, and twelve-hour weekend days with straight overtime, for about two months before I start getting burned out.
3. Would you be willing to make a one way trip to Mars if the annual mortality rate was 50%? 25%? 10%?
   No. Perhaps, if the pay was in keeping with the risk. Yes. Here again, it depends somewhat on the particulars. Are the stated mortality rates for all settlers, including in the pool the life-shortening effects of particularly high-risk activities that my occupation wouldn’t entail? 50% is pretty high under any interpretation, but for the lower percentages such particulars would matter a great deal in making a decision.
4. Would you be willing to make a one way trip to Mars if the level of privacy were equivalent to a subway car? A submarine? Antarctic research station?
   I’m going to interpret these three conditions in the following way:
   Subway car = a group of settlers sharing a common space, with no real privacy and little or no recognition of a property claim to any particular portion of the accommodations beyond one’s own personal gear.
   Submarine = a group of settlers share a common space in which a small degree of privacy such as a curtain exists and some element of private property is recognized (my bunk, my locker).
   Antarctic research center = like in a college dormitory, a group of settlers shares some defined common spaces (galley, work room) while having a higher degree of privacy in and more exclusive property rights over other spaces which they share with a small subset of the group.
   In the past three weeks, I’ve experienced all three of these environments – the first in the form of airplane travel and mountain hut accommodations, the second in the form of tent camping and hostels, and the third in the form of a guesthouse-style hotel. In the short term (obviously) I could live with any of the three, but over the long term, I could live with the arctic option pretty easily, the submarine option with a great deal of reluctance, and the subway option not at all. My threshold between short and long term would probably be the time it would take to get to Mars, and as long as there were some significant ”rest” periods separating them, I could probably accommodate myself to routinely doing short term stints in lower privacy.
5. Would you be willing to make a one way trip to Mars if it was just yourself? 10 other people? 100 other people?
   Assuming this means being the sole occupants of one settlement among many: possibly, yes, and yes.
   If it means I/we would be the sole occupants of Mars, no, yes, yes. 
   If the question literally applies to the outward trip to Mars: yes, yes, yes.
6. Would you be willing to make a one way trip to Mars if it meant eating food indefinitely equivalent to combat rations? TV dinners? School cafeteria?
   Possibly on all three accounts. How happy I would be depends on how much variety exists (assuming the point of the question is about the excitement of the food) – even bland food can be palatable for long periods of time if there is some variety (ie: bland freeze-dried lasagna every night is far less tolerable than a random schedule of equally-bland dinners of freeze-dried lasagna, freeze-dried turkey and stuffing, and freeze-dried meatloaf). I would not, however, allow this to be the sole discriminator on whether or not I went if the other conditions were acceptable.
7. Would you be willing to make a one way trip to Mars if there were significantly more people of your own gender than the other? Vice versa?
    The supply and demand implications of being a man on a planet of women are certainly more pleasant to contemplate than a Martian sausage-fest, so trivially I would say “reluctantly and hell yeah!”, although I wouldn’t let either case decide for me if offered the opportunity. As with the other questions, though, “it depends” applies. How big is the group, and what is the ratio? Two women and one man is not the same as four women and two men, for example, or three women and one man, or two hundred women and one hundred men. Also, how long the initial demographics could be expected to apply would also have to be figured in – would the ratio favor men or women indefinitely, or just for a short period before balance was established (or the pendulum swung for a while to the other extreme)?

My answers to the “control” questions:

1. What is the longest period of time you have ever been by yourself? Separated from wife and children? Away from civilization?
   Literally without contact, 4-5 days; cut off from friends and family and direct sources of support and assistance, three months. Not applicable. About two weeks.
2. What are the longest hours you’ve ever worked? How long did you work these hours? How long would you have been willing to work these hours?
   See #2 above.
3. What’s the most dangerous work you’ve ever done? What’s the most dangerous activity you normally engage in?
   I’ve never done any truly dangerous work. Hiking “fourteeners” in the Rockies.
4. What’s the lowest level of privacy you’ve ever experienced? For how long?
   Probably living in university dorms for two years.
5. What’s the most bland diet you’ve ever experienced? For how long?
   Probably three months in Germany living mainly on dried quattro formaggi and vollkornbrot. Somewhere between bland and monotonous.
6. Have you ever had to work for/with someone you intensely disliked? How long did this go on?
   Oh hell yes, every job I’ve ever had there’s been at least one in the crew.
7. Have you ever had to live with someone you intensely disliked? How long did this go on?
   A few times, but one particular three-month period living with a pair of man-hating feminists far and away outshines all the others (don’t ask).

Posted on August 2nd, 2010 under Meta, Settlement. Comments Off