Will anyone alive today see a permanent colony on the Moon or Mars?

[Ken Fabian]

But are you accounting for the fabulously expensive transport costs?

Up out of one gravity well, across 50 million miles and down into another?

That was in reference to the difference between bases and colonies - not so clear with a quote of previous quote. I think the Earth economy could manage to build and supply a Mars or moon base - at great expense. Whilst some in-situ resources can help I don't think a local economy - a colony - can supply itself, even feed itself. Supplement the imported supplies maybe, like some fresh greens under lights in Antarctica.

The avoided transport costs still aren't enough advantage when it takes such a massive pre-investment to build the infrastructure for growing food.

Copper? I was thinking motors for pumps and wiring for lighting. Lots of pumps, lots of lights. But I was also thinking it is premature to attempt a permanent settlement in expectation it has the potential to become self sufficient later without knowing the essential resources are there. Not only available on Mars (or moon) but nearby. Maybe aluminium could substitute for copper but is that present in concentrated ore bodies?

 

[PeroK]

I feel this reply may be a setup for an old SF reader, but will take the bait. SF author Robert Heinlein in 1966 posited a future Lunar penal colony populated by prison guards made up of Federated Nations (aka UN) dragoons and a Warden appointed by a Lunar Authority watching over aging deportees and their rather prosperous descendants. "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress".

Written as a prequel to Heinlein's juvenile novel "The Rolling Stones", "Mistress" incorporates many of the objections to off-world colonies in this thread using some fancy literary footwork. Humans survive underground on Luna, drilling and sealing "cubit" and mining ice deposits to replenish fresh water. Colonists undergo "irreversible physiological changes" from low gravity after a few months making deportation a life sentence. An excellent gimmick IMO.

This sets the stage for an isolated "locked room" Lunar culture with avant garde marital customs and fanciful language variants. Fascinated by international 20th Century politics, the author leads us, central characters, and a self-aware AI computer to an inevitable revolution against the Lunar Authority.

The first priority in a thread like this is to distinguish what is science fiction, made up as the basis for a story. This is pure fantasy.

 

[DaveC426913]

What if we looked at "permanent" from a different angle? For example, when they start having babies.

A base/colony will always trade for precioius resources with its motherland because: commerce, but if it can't have natives, it's not self-sustaining.

 

[BWV]

What if we looked at "permanent" from a different angle? For example, when they start having babies.

A base/colony will always trade for precioius resources with its motherland because: commerce, but if it can't have natives, it's not self-sustaining

A good body of research indicates it’s not possible to bring a healthy fetus to term in microgravity, then even if you could, what do you have to do? Some sort of spinning crèche to facilitate normal muscle development? You need a couple of hundred meter diameter to offset the inner ear / motion sickness. And what kid gets selected to be the first test case?

 

[berkeman]

Thread is closed for Moderation.

 

[berkeman]

After some cleanup, the thread is reopened provisionally. Please try to avoid making political statements at PF. Thanks.

 

[Klystron]

The first priority in a thread like this is to distinguish what is science fiction, made up as the basis for a story. This is pure fantasy.

Agree with the first sentence, accepting this admonishment. The second item begs the questions, "What is fantasy? How do we distinguish science fiction from pure fantasy?", a subject for a different discussion.

Apropos space colonies, many SF authors have turned to recent colonial history such as Botany Bay, French Guiana, Siberian Gulags, etc. for examples of science exploration missions later exploited as penal colonies. This subject would be better explored at a political site such as CivicsWatch, but this does not abrogate the responsibility for observing human rights in future space exploration and exploitation.

 

[Ken Fabian]

My pessimism is mostly grounded in resources and economics, at both ends - Earth and 'colony' - but don't dismiss other concerns like human biological responses to low gravity (which, like most aspects, there can be solutions to, eg centrifuge habitats (spinning pie dish style?). Quotes around colony because I think this is far more unlike the Earth historical comparisons than like - more like a large scale experiment in human survival in extreme conditions than any kind of opportunity.

I see no inevitability, not of technological progress making such things so much cheaper and easier that the technical issues go away, nor do I see any innate human desire to explore and expand into space; promoting unreasonable expectations can make it superficially popular. Fantasy is more popular than SF. One humorist has suggested we are more likely to develop and breed telepathic fire breathing dragons than colonise Mars.

Low cost transport made a lot of colonial expansion possible and (where present) the abundance of readily exploitable resources and trade in physical resources made colonies successful and self supporting... within the greater economy they were tied to and part of. Few if any were ever sufficiently self sufficient that they could not only survive prolonged isolation but could thrive in that isolation.

We have to go back to the earliest human migrations to find successful colonising based in self sufficiency. Because the environments they found were rich in readily usable resources that were exploitable using the existing knowledge and skills in a few heads.

 

[Klystron]

We have to go back to the earliest human migrations to find successful colonising based in self sufficiency. Because the environments they found were rich in readily usable resources that were exploitable using the existing knowledge and skills in a few heads.

Correct, and these colonies were Terran. Consider complexity of space habitats.

• No breathable air.
• No accessible potable water.
• No edible plants nor animals.
• No native food sources.
• Little protection from solar and cosmic radiation in transit.
• Exposure to space debris.
• Extremely long distances among natural objects.

This partial list eschewing aforementioned low gravity, barely covers inherent difficulties of human life outside our home planet. These problems can be solved with sufficiently advanced technology and ingenuity but habitats must be maintained indefinitely. Consider the cost of maternity crèches and an environment safe for raising children added to the 'outpost' colony.