Space Colony

[ToryLane]

Curious as to why you say that since we're already on our way back to the moon to actually set up a colony there while SpaceX is currently developing their rockets further in order to achieve settlement on Mars. It will most definitely be in our lifetime since the Nasa Artemis Program is set to officially launch no earlier than May 2024. Mars is set to be late 2020s or early 2030s.

because Musk is alway liying spaceX is faaaar from ready they lost couple of rocket and satelites already and thats not live cargo. and ok NASA will maybe send people on Mars but not colony no way still to many problems 1 one is food because there will not be resuplying, radiation, oxigen.plus couple of month traveling one dir.... so no not in our life time and sure nor Musk sry foe my eng spellinh not my lang

 

[Jamess20]

because Musk is alway liying spaceX is faaaar from ready they lost couple of rocket and satelites already and thats not live cargo. and ok NASA will maybe send people on Mars but not colony no way still to many problems 1 one is food because there will not be resuplying, radiation, oxigen.plus couple of month traveling one dir.... so no not in our life time and sure nor Musk sry foe my eng spellinh not my lang

I'm so confused, everything you just listed has been solved. Radiation will be shielded with the material on the craft, food can be grown and will probably be grown on the moon along with Mars. Scientists have already grown plants with soil from the moon. Oxygen? There's water in the form of ice on the moon and that's been confirmed numerous times. Simply put, they separate the oxygen from the two hydrogen which is efficient as the oxygen will be used for breathing and the hydrogen used for fuel. They can return back because of that simple fact.

With your argument about SpaceX being far away, this is the same company who managed to have self landing rockets. That in itself is a major achievement for aerospace engineering. On top of that, every space agency has had failures, NASA, SpaceX, Blue Origin. Any aerospace agency you can name have had failures which is what we learn and take data from. Also remember, NASA is almost 60 years older than SpaceX so if you really want to compare the two, it's not really fair. However, SpaceX is making great strides and these agencies' efforts should not be downplayed.

 

[ToryLane]

I'm so confused, everything you just listed has been solved. Radiation will be shielded with the material on the craft, food can be grown and will probably be grown on the moon along with Mars. Scientists have already grown plants with soil from the moon. Oxygen? There's water in the form of ice on the moon and that's been confirmed numerous times. Simply put, they separate the oxygen from the two hydrogen which is efficient as the oxygen will be used for breathing and the hydrogen used for fuel. They can return back because of that simple fact.

With your argument about SpaceX being far away, this is the same company who managed to have self landing rockets. That in itself is a major achievement for aerospace engineering. On top of that, every space agency has had failures, NASA, SpaceX, Blue Origin. Any aerospace agency you can name have had failures which is what we learn and take data from. Also remember, NASA is almost 60 years older than SpaceX so if you really want to compare the two, it's not really fair. However, SpaceX is making great strides and these agencies' efforts should not be downplayed.

proof of concept is far from being solved.. about self lending rocket just a publicity show its tot even optimal case you need fule for lankding and you know how precious is fuel when you lunch a rocket, but if you look at thing how they are, its bad... i know people like musk like he is next gates or something but he is a bullshiter a lot of things he is saying is dump if you know some about phisics you see throu his nonses... just go watch some videos of tunderfoot on youtube he is nuklear phisics and he debunks him lke a boss

 

[Jamess20]

proof of concept is far from being solved.. about self lending rocket just a publicity show its tot even optimal case you need fule for lankding and you know how precious is fuel when you lunch a rocket, but if you look at thing how they are, its bad... i know people like musk like he is next gates or something but he is a bullshiter a lot of things he is saying is dump if you know some about phisics you see throu his nonses... just go watch some videos of tunderfoot on youtube he is nuklear phisics and he debunks him lke a boss

As an engineer, I believe I would know about some physics and science behind the rockets along with the entire project. Musk himself is mostly just a figurehead but what's important is he knows how to invest and is doing a phenomenal job at propelling the entirety of aerospace technology forward. If you think he solves most the problems on rockets and whatnot, you're sorely mistaken. Those jobs are for the actual engineers who develop the rockets and they're the ones who problem solve every little problem that comes forward during research and development.

Do you believe Musk is always working on the rockets? No, he gathers information from chief engineers assigned to any project and they tell him what they're working on, he then projects these summaries in interviews. That's how any business runs. There's the investor or founder, the chief engineers and technicians, engineers for different subcategories, and then down the tree we go. Everyone lower has to explain to their superiors and those superiors have to explain to their bosses, etc.

Back to your self landing rocket argument, if it is a publicity stunt or not, isn't it still a breakthrough? Isn't it still a step into the future where we are now capable of self landing rockets? If you're worried about fuel, we're also working on that but as everything else in the world boils down to, the problem is energy. If you break down any problem in the world, it comes down to energy and Musk had already proposed a solution to that issue in the form of a massive solar array. If you'd like me to go more in-depth on how everything is related to energy, you may ask.

Being a nuclear physicist gives you insight to physics and maybe general engineering but you also have to remember, they specialize in nuclear physics. Not engineering. Even if Musk himself gets some concepts wrong, but is he the company? Or are his workers the company? That's something that's misunderstood by a lot of people, he's not the chief engineer, he doesn't even have an engineering degree, he most likely just attends the meetings. However, all this should not downplay the fact he's one of the few investors to fund space research and development, which in itself is a very important step towards advancing humanity.

If you'd like a comparison, see it like this. Making fun and calling a person out because they're showing off their toy is not the same as making fun of and calling out the person who designed the toy.

 

[ToryLane]

As an engineer, I believe I would know about some physics and science behind the rockets along with the entire project. Musk himself is mostly just a figurehead but what's important is he knows how to invest and is doing a phenomenal job at propelling the entirety of aerospace technology forward. If you think he solves most the problems on rockets and whatnot, you're sorely mistaken. Those jobs are for the actual engineers who develop the rockets and they're the ones who problem solve every little problem that comes forward during research and development.

Do you believe Musk is always working on the rockets? No, he gathers information from chief engineers assigned to any project and they tell him what they're working on, he then projects these summaries in interviews. That's how any business runs. There's the investor or founder, the chief engineers and technicians, engineers for different subcategories, and then down the tree we go. Everyone lower has to explain to their superiors and those superiors have to explain to their bosses, etc.

Back to your self landing rocket argument, if it is a publicity stunt or not, isn't it still a breakthrough? Isn't it still a step into the future where we are now capable of self landing rockets? If you're worried about fuel, we're also working on that but as everything else in the world boils down to, the problem is energy. If you break down any problem in the world, it comes down to energy and Musk had already proposed a solution to that issue in the form of a massive solar array. If you'd like me to go more in-depth on how everything is related to energy, you may ask.

Being a nuclear physicist gives you insight to physics and maybe general engineering but you also have to remember, they specialize in nuclear physics. Not engineering. Even if Musk himself gets some concepts wrong, but is he the company? Or are his workers the company? That's something that's misunderstood by a lot of people, he's not the chief engineer, he doesn't even have an engineering degree, he most likely just attends the meetings. However, all this should not downplay the fact he's one of the few investors to fund space research and development, which in itself is a very important step towards advancing humanity.

If you'd like a comparison, see it like this. Making fun and calling a person out because they're showing off their toy is not the same as making fun of and calling out the person who designed the toy.

i


if you think that musks ideas like hyperloop and electrics trucks neurolink ect. sounds good idea, then sry you dont know a lot..

 

[Jamess20]

i


if you think that musks ideas like hyperloop and electrics trucks neurolink ect. sounds good idea, then sry you dont know a lot..

The topic is about space colonies and whether or not they're viable, not about hating on Elon Musk. If you'd like to hate on Elon Musk, create a new thread. If not, refrain from deviating around the current topic, I'd like to see why else you think it's impossible for us to get up to our closest celestial bodies.