Ariane is in deep denial about SpaceX BFR

Astrophysicist Francis Rocard lead the Solar System exploration program at CNES. He was interviewed by a French newspaper Courrier International. Rocard showed that Ariane is still in denial about SpaceX. They accept Falcon 9 and now the block 5 Falcon 9 are the lowest cost rockets and that the reuse of first stages is a huge breakthrough. Rocard does not talk about Falcon Heavy.

Rocard believes or hopes that SpaceX will not get the BFR funded. Rocard believes that NASA will not supply the $2 to 10 billion because of the funding of the Space Launch System (SLS).

Rocard is not wanting to recognize that there are components of BFR already being built and that the Raptor engines appears to be close to working.

SpaceX is dominating commercial launch already and will be making $20-40 million from each commercial launch and $40-100 million from NASA and military launches.

Nextbigfuture expects SpaceX to win more and more NASA and military launches.

SpaceX made $200-400 million from the pre-sale of the moon orbiting mission for billionaire tourist Yasuku Maezawa.

SpaceX has demonstrated to the world that they can reuse launchers, rockets, which is a real revolution currently in the space field.

Elon Musk is completely crazy.

His long-term approach is extremely questionable ethically since he wants to colonize Mars. Mars is for him plan B. And I find it extremely questionable. This is not the American approach and it is certainly not the approach of CNES.

Rocard is saying that making humanity multi-planet is unethical. The ethical thing is to only have one planet and to help Earth. Nextbigfuture observes that Dinosaurs were ethical according to Rocard.

And what he announces loudly in high-traffic conferences, his Big Fucking Rocket (BFR ), his Raptor, all that is science fiction… And Musk is only concerned about one thing: transportation. In fact, it has the same approach as the Falcon 9. Let me explain: SpaceX, with its Falcon 9, sold the idea of ​a cheap launcher. NASA paid to see and funded SpaceX up to $ 500 million. SpaceX was serious and it is going well. NASA has contracted $7 billion.

I do not believe [BFR] too much because Nasa has already invested billions of dollars on a launcher called the Space Launch System, the SLS. NASA has no interest in shooting itself in the foot by financing the BFR. SpaceX alone will not be able to finance the BFR and the Raptor … In the very long term, Elon Musk’s approach is bluffing.

550 thoughts on “Ariane is in deep denial about SpaceX BFR”

  1. You can increase the mass of Mars by redirecting asteroids and comments to Mars, this will also thicken the atmossatmo and help to warm it up as well as supplying more prescious metals 🙂

    Reply
  2. I would weigh about 90 lb and see no problem with that. Human bodies would adapt. Considering the fact that you would frequently need to walk around in heavy gear it is a blessing that Mars has less gravity.

    Reply
  3. The solution is easy: Send fat people to mars. If mars gravity is 1/3 of the earth gravity, then send people who weight 3 x slim

    Reply
  4. NASA will shoot itself in the foot if it continues it’s ULA crony supporting idiocy. If it continues on this path, you’re going to see nearly all launches done by SpaceX, and perhaps niche launchers like the value engineered electron vehicle by rocket lab. Governments like the EU, Russia, and China will use their nationally produced launch vehicles, for at least part of their launches, but it will be tempting to get it done for half, or a third the price. I can’t wait to see what the cost of launching ULA’s expendable vehicle, with reusable engines will be. Doesn’t it seem like they would try to build a reusable launcher, now that it it undeniably a fact that it can be done? Not invented here, and planned obsolescence principles on full display! It will become more, and more clear that ULA is on taxpayer funded life support, and that NASA officials are being paid off with cushy consulting jobs after retiring from NASA, or some other quid quo pro. ULA will have no buyers except US government agencies. This is particularly stupid, since SpaceX is American, certainly more American than anti-competitive ULA! Rocard overestimates the cost of developing BFR. Falcon 9 was developed nearly from scratch. The only radically different component of BFR is the Raptor engine. Reports are that they are being built, and testing is proceeding well. If the Raptor can be developed, I don’t see any show stoppers. The BFR is not being developed on some cost plus crooked contract. It’s for the company, by the company, and money is spent as if it has value. Rocard is using ESA standards to judge an entrepreneurial company.

    Reply
  5. The biggest problem with Mars/Moon colonization is that you can’t terraform gravity: “When I read Zubrin’s book The Case For Mars, I was so intrigued by this surprising omission that I consulted a friend who is a space medic at JSC. He tells me that this issue was once discussed at a conference of medical doctors who had actually worked with the long-term residents of Mir and ISS. NONE of these experts thought that humans could adapt permanently to Mars gravity! Why don’t the Zubrinistas discuss these issues? They will have to be solved before anyone lives permanently on Mars (or even for the ~18 months which is the minimum useful stay time as fixed by orbital mechanics). It’s not too early to think about them.” For some reason, links can’t be posted here. To find the entire article above, just do a web search on “The Dream Palace Of The Space Cadets” by Jeffrey F. Bell.

    Reply
  6. We know zero gravity is bad. We know 1g is good. We simply *don’t know* how 0.38 g will go down. Anyone who says they do is a liar. Is it going to give everyone a mild case of Osteoporosis, treatable with an exercise regime and meds? Will it knock about 1 year off a human life? 5 years? Would people be willing to pay that price anyway? Answer? We just *don’t know.*

    Reply
  7. The biggest problem with Mars/Moon colonization is that you can’t terraform gravity: “Another thing you never see from the Mars Society is a realistic discussion of what would happen to the human body in the low Martian gravity. Zubrin has discussed at length the need for artificial spin gravity on the 6 month trip to Mars. But he assumes that the problem ends once the astronauts land on Mars. The problem of bone loss in a 0.38g field on Mars for ~18 months is completely ignored. When I read Zubrin’s book The Case For Mars, I was so intrigued by this surprising omission that I consulted a friend who is a space medic at JSC. He tells me that this issue was once discussed at a conference of medical doctors who had actually worked with the long-term residents of Mir and ISS. NONE of these experts thought that humans could adapt permanently to Mars gravity!” For some reason, links can’t be posted here. To find the above article in its entirety, just do a web search on “The Dream Palace Of The Space Cadets” by Jeffrey F. Bell.

    Reply
  8. You can increase the mass of Mars by redirecting asteroids and comments to Mars this will also thicken the atmossatmo and help to warm it up as well as supplying more prescious metals 🙂

    Reply
  9. I would weigh about 90 lb and see no problem with that. Human bodies would adapt. Considering the fact that you would frequently need to walk around in heavy gear it is a blessing that Mars has less gravity.

    Reply
  10. How can these experts even make such a conclusion. Microgravity on ISS and 40{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} on Mars ain’t the same thing.

    Reply
  11. The solution is easy: Send fat people to mars. If mars gravity is 1/3 of the earth gravity then send people who weight 3 x slim

    Reply
  12. NASA will shoot itself in the foot if it continues it’s ULA crony supporting idiocy. If it continues on this path you’re going to see nearly all launches done by SpaceX and perhaps niche launchers like the value engineered electron vehicle by rocket lab. Governments like the EU Russia and China will use their nationally produced launch vehicles for at least part of their launches but it will be tempting to get it done for half or a third the price.I can’t wait to see what the cost of launching ULA’s expendable vehicle with reusable engines will be. Doesn’t it seem like they would try to build a reusable launcher now that it it undeniably a fact that it can be done? Not invented here and planned obsolescence principles on full display! It will become more and more clear that ULA is on taxpayer funded life support and that NASA officials are being paid off with cushy consulting jobs after retiring from NASA or some other quid quo pro. ULA will have no buyers except US government agencies. This is particularly stupid since SpaceX is American certainly more American than anti-competitive ULA! Rocard overestimates the cost of developing BFR. Falcon 9 was developed nearly from scratch. The only radically different component of BFR is the Raptor engine. Reports are that they are being built and testing is proceeding well. If the Raptor can be developed I don’t see any show stoppers. The BFR is not being developed on some cost plus crooked contract. It’s for the company by the company and money is spent as if it has value. Rocard is using ESA standards to judge an entrepreneurial company.

    Reply
  13. The biggest problem with Mars/Moon colonization is that you can’t terraform gravity:When I read Zubrin’s book The Case For Mars” I was so intrigued by this surprising omission that I consulted a friend who is a space medic at JSC. He tells me that this issue was once discussed at a conference of medical doctors who had actually worked with the long-term residents of Mir and ISS. NONE of these experts thought that humans could adapt permanently to Mars gravity!Why don’t the Zubrinistas discuss these issues? They will have to be solved before anyone lives permanently on Mars (or even for the ~18 months which is the minimum useful stay time as fixed by orbital mechanics). It’s not too early to think about them.””For some reason”” links can’t be posted here. To find the entire article above”” just do a web search on “”””The Dream Palace Of The Space Cadets”””” by Jeffrey F. Bell.”””

    Reply
  14. We know zero gravity is bad. We know 1g is good. We simply *don’t know* how 0.38 g will go down. Anyone who says they do is a liar. Is it going to give everyone a mild case of Osteoporosis treatable with an exercise regime and meds? Will it knock about 1 year off a human life? 5 years? Would people be willing to pay that price anyway? Answer? We just *don’t know.*

    Reply
  15. The biggest problem with Mars/Moon colonization is that you can’t terraform gravity:Another thing you never see from the Mars Society is a realistic discussion of what would happen to the human body in the low Martian gravity. Zubrin has discussed at length the need for artificial spin gravity on the 6 month trip to Mars. But he assumes that the problem ends once the astronauts land on Mars. The problem of bone loss in a 0.38g field on Mars for ~18 months is completely ignored.When I read Zubrin’s book The Case For Mars” I was so intrigued by this surprising omission that I consulted a friend who is a space medic at JSC. He tells me that this issue was once discussed at a conference of medical doctors who had actually worked with the long-term residents of Mir and ISS. NONE of these experts thought that humans could adapt permanently to Mars gravity!””For some reason”” links can’t be posted here. To find the above article in its entirety”” just do a web search on “”””The Dream Palace Of The Space Cadets”””” by Jeffrey F. Bell.”””

    Reply
  16. The magnetic field issue is quite easy to solve, believe it or not. Just look up “artificial magnetosphere”. It involves the positioning of a space-borne magnetic shield at the L1 libration point of Mars. Mars would constantly remain in the “shadow” or “magnetail” of the spacecraft’s magnetic field, thus solving (1) the cosmic radiation problem and (2) the atmospheric erosion problem at the same time.

    Reply
  17. Elon is a naturalized American by now, so he can legally do what he does concerning the regulations. By the looks of it, he is also still holding his South African and Canadian citizenship (?). AThe required greencard and regulatory permissions for foreigners are VERY difficult to attain – they do technically produce ICBMs there.. . So yes, almost only Americans are allowed into the company. Perhaps policies can change in the future.

    Reply
  18. It would be quite easy to test the effects of 0.38g in a rotating space station. You don’t need a big 2001-style wheel, just two tin cans (or two Bigelow modules?) at both ends of a boom or tether. For reasons of comfort, the boom/tether should be long enough to minimize Coriolis forces.

    Reply
  19. There aren’t enough asteroids to significantly increase the mass of Mars. The entire asteroid belt would only increase Mars’ mass by about half a percent. It’d be fine for atmosphere, but we’re better off just mining them and making ring habitats. That being said, we may not need to increase the mass. 38% may be absolutely fine for humans, we just don’t know yet because nobody has put a variable-G station in LEO to test it.

    Reply
  20. I was working in the satellite and space electronics department at Airbus and quit recently. Let me tell you, almost all space and rocket engineers there are living in an isolated echo chamber – a true and unironic madhouse that irrevocably destroys your mind, heart and sould, the longer you work there. After some time, I began to make a sport out of quasi-forcing my ‘critical’ colleagues to watch live webcasts of SpaceX launches. One guy lost his mind and actually said: “What?! That’s real and not just a simulation???!! Huhh??!”. I can’t even begin to describe his facial expressions then and there. And that was when SpaceX already had like 20 successful landings under their belt.. . The Europeans are in utter denial. Europe is finished. Ariane 6 is a joke. And they know it. Still, no intentions to change anything. Too many pigs fed by the oppressed european tax payers. And so the death spiral turns.. . Most engineers there seriously asked: Does it really make any sense to try and reuse a rocket? I asked in return: Do you throw away your car, because the gas tank is empty – and do you buy a new car each time your tank goes empty? Or do you just refill and go on driving? Some of the colleagues realized their utter moronism in saying what they said – but only after numerous forced encounters with reality by me. Talk about cognitive dissonance.. . I somewhat wish I could see the dumbfounded faces when SpaceX has built and tested their first BFS’es. On the other hand.. nah. Let them decay into irrelevance. Best wishes to SpaceX. It’s sad I can’t work for SpaceX as a non-Murican. Cheers!

    Reply
  21. The magnetic field issue is quite easy to solve believe it or not. Just look up artificial magnetosphere””. It involves the positioning of a space-borne magnetic shield at the L1 libration point of Mars. Mars would constantly remain in the “”””shadow”””” or “”””magnetail”””” of the spacecraft’s magnetic field”””” thus solving (1) the cosmic radiation problem and (2) the atmospheric erosion problem at the same time.”””

    Reply
  22. Elon is a naturalized American by now so he can legally do what he does concerning the regulations. By the looks of it he is also still holding his South African and Canadian citizenship (?). AThe required greencard and regulatory permissions for foreigners are VERY difficult to attain – they do technically produce ICBMs there.. . So yes almost only Americans are allowed into the company. Perhaps policies can change in the future.

    Reply
  23. It would be quite easy to test the effects of 0.38g in a rotating space station. You don’t need a big 2001-style wheel just two tin cans (or two Bigelow modules?) at both ends of a boom or tether. For reasons of comfort the boom/tether should be long enough to minimize Coriolis forces.

    Reply
  24. There aren’t enough asteroids to significantly increase the mass of Mars. The entire asteroid belt would only increase Mars’ mass by about half a percent. It’d be fine for atmosphere but we’re better off just mining them and making ring habitats. That being said we may not need to increase the mass. 38{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} may be absolutely fine for humans we just don’t know yet because nobody has put a variable-G station in LEO to test it.

    Reply
  25. I was working in the satellite and space electronics department at Airbus and quit recently. Let me tell you almost all space and rocket engineers there are living in an isolated echo chamber – a true and unironic madhouse that irrevocably destroys your mind heart and sould the longer you work there. After some time I began to make a sport out of quasi-forcing my ‘critical’ colleagues to watch live webcasts of SpaceX launches. One guy lost his mind and actually said: What?! That’s real and not just a simulation???!! Huhh??!””. I can’t even begin to describe his facial expressions then and there. And that was when SpaceX already had like 20 successful landings under their belt.. . The Europeans are in utter denial. Europe is finished. Ariane 6 is a joke. And they know it. Still”” no intentions to change anything. Too many pigs fed by the oppressed european tax payers. And so the death spiral turns.. .Most engineers there seriously asked: Does it really make any sense to try and reuse a rocket? I asked in return: Do you throw away your car”” because the gas tank is empty – and do you buy a new car each time your tank goes empty? Or do you just refill and go on driving? Some of the colleagues realized their utter moronism in saying what they said – but only after numerous forced encounters with reality by me. Talk about cognitive dissonance.. .I somewhat wish I could see the dumbfounded faces when SpaceX has built and tested their first BFS’es. On the other hand.. nah. Let them decay into irrelevance. Best wishes to SpaceX. It’s sad I can’t work for SpaceX as a non-Murican.Cheers!”””

    Reply
  26. We didn’t talk about the moon landings. But yeah.. can’t exclude for 100% that some of them have their doubts.. . As I said, a true madhouse.

    Reply
  27. Which in this case would probably be a good thing. Humanity doesn’t need more roadblocks. It needs less. It’s normal for cultures to emerge, thrive and then disappear.

    Reply
  28. I’ve never seen anything like this before in my whole life. Let me say it this way.. they are losing talent a lot faster than they are gaining talent. The remaining young colleagues are fleeing the sinking ship, and the old engineers are gritting their teeth and try to somehow not go insance for another couple years to be able to go into early retirement. It’s mindblowing.

    Reply
  29. The US government may have to subsidize a second launch capability, such as ULA. Effectively they already are with launch costs several times higher and an annual $1 billion launch readiness contract.

    Reply
  30. Deep denial doesn’t even cover it. This was just plain weird. Why would be multi-planetary be unethical? The opposite would be. (context aside) What is not normal, is someone how’s 40 years old and still living with his/her parents. Or someone who never want’s to get out of the cradle to grow up. Should the French never had explored and colonized the New-world? I for one, am glad they did. I’m a proud french speaking descendant of these intrepid explorers and prisoners and prostitutes. The first nations to colonize the solar system will be able ensure the dominance of their cultures in the centuries to come. I believe we are at the brink of a new colonization age. And if all the French think as he does (probably not), there culture is doomed to be left behind.

    Reply
  31. There’s no point going to Mars to live in a big centrifuge. It’ll be bad enough living in caves. Martians will have to accept the adaptations that will be selected on their bodies. (low G, high radiation, etc)

    Reply
  32. True. The human species will diverge. Martians will become taller and leaner. Their bone mass will deplete to about 40% of that of Earth. Their frames and muscles will become too weak to function on Earth. The first people who go back and forth will have a hard time readapting to Earth. Those born and living on Mars will most likely never be able to visit Earth. Although they could holiday in Earth spacestations.

    Reply
  33. First off ESA reckoned re-usability won’t work. Then it was re-usability isn’t economically viable. Then it was re-usability can’t go beyond one re-use. Currently true but about to be disproven. Now it’s BFR is and Raptors are SciFi. Only both are being built. Now it’s SpaceX can’t afford to build it on their own. That may be right, but current progress suggests this is wrong. If most of the design premises of BFR are correct then SpaceX will reduce cost of orbital launches to sub $10 million and only the French and a few member states left in the EU will use Ariane. If on the other hand the ESA ostriches are correct, they have nothing to worry about.

    Reply
  34. A number of papers, decades old, was published about microgravity already and experiments aboard ISS just confirmed this. There is no way to adapt the human body to mars gravity. By thinking about obese people or heavy metal shoes means You don’t understand the problem. The only way for permanent living on mars surface is the building of giant rotating habitats.

    Reply
  35. Which in this case would probably be a good thing. Humanity doesn’t need more roadblocks. It needs less. It’s normal for cultures to emerge thrive and then disappear.

    Reply
  36. I’ve never seen anything like this before in my whole life. Let me say it this way.. they are losing talent a lot faster than they are gaining talent. The remaining young colleagues are fleeing the sinking ship and the old engineers are gritting their teeth and try to somehow not go insance for another couple years to be able to go into early retirement. It’s mindblowing.

    Reply
  37. The US government may have to subsidize a second launch capability such as ULA. Effectively they already are with launch costs several times higher and an annual $1 billion launch readiness contract.

    Reply
  38. Deep denial doesn’t even cover it. This was just plain weird. Why would be multi-planetary be unethical? The opposite would be. (context aside) What is not normal is someone how’s 40 years old and still living with his/her parents. Or someone who never want’s to get out of the cradle to grow up. Should the French never had explored and colonized the New-world? I for one am glad they did. I’m a proud french speaking descendant of these intrepid explorers and prisoners and prostitutes. The first nations to colonize the solar system will be able ensure the dominance of their cultures in the centuries to come. I believe we are at the brink of a new colonization age. And if all the French think as he does (probably not) there culture is doomed to be left behind.

    Reply
  39. There’s no point going to Mars to live in a big centrifuge. It’ll be bad enough living in caves. Martians will have to accept the adaptations that will be selected on their bodies. (low G high radiation etc)

    Reply
  40. True. The human species will diverge.Martians will become taller and leaner. Their bone mass will deplete to about 40{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of that of Earth.Their frames and muscles will become too weak to function on Earth.The first people who go back and forth will have a hard time readapting to Earth.Those born and living on Mars will most likely never be able to visit Earth. Although they could holiday in Earth spacestations.

    Reply
  41. First off ESA reckoned re-usability won’t work.Then it was re-usability isn’t economically viable.Then it was re-usability can’t go beyond one re-use. Currently true but about to be disproven.Now it’s BFR is and Raptors are SciFi. Only both are being built.Now it’s SpaceX can’t afford to build it on their own. That may be right but current progress suggests this is wrong.If most of the design premises of BFR are correct then SpaceX will reduce cost of orbital launches to sub $10 million and only the French and a few member states left in the EU will use Ariane.If on the other hand the ESA ostriches are correct they have nothing to worry about.

    Reply
  42. A number of papers decades old was published about microgravity already and experiments aboard ISS just confirmed this.There is no way to adapt the human body to mars gravity.By thinking about obese people or heavy metal shoes means You don’t understand the problem.The only way for permanent living on mars surface is the building of giant rotating habitats.

    Reply
  43. From my perspective of human nature, right now is the perfect time to at least start the process. If we wait until we absolutely need to (the elbows-to-elbows state), then it’s already too late. Unfortunately, mobilizing humans on a grand scale usually needs a grand push first….

    Reply
  44. No, you make the system parallely redundant and put it at the L1 point but offset against the solar wind pressure. It is possible that is what you were thinking, and I misunderstood you.

    Reply
  45. From what I learned a few years ago, the human body will adapt the lunar gravity more or less like it does to microgravity (not enough stimulus to change otherwise), whereas Mars has enough stimulus to significantly reduce the physiological changes seen in microgravity adaptation. I think you may need to review more current literature.

    Reply
  46. Someone’s salty about Ariane 6 vs. BFR, with the former having worse cost/performance over it’s predecessor, and the latter having immense operational capability along with planned tests a year before the former.

    Reply
  47. It’s perfectly fine for those that don’t want to participate or even believe or endorse such things not to do it. As long as those who want and can are able to, everything will be OK for everyone.

    Reply
  48. That’s not how gravity works. It isn’t an all or nothing deal. Mars isn’t microgravity. We need a variable-g test station in orbit to be sure of what the long term effects are going to be.

    Reply
  49. The military budget spends twice what NASA does for space launch. DARPA ‘Blackjack’ for military LEO projects will support development.

    Reply
  50. Consider the dynamic pressure of solar plasma interacting with a magnetic system large enough to shield Mars. Requires the device to accelerate the plasma to generate the thrust for station-keeping at the libration point; and, concurrently divert the plasma around Mars. TANFL!

    Reply
  51. Mr. Rocard belongs to those who believe that others are even more incompetent than he himself is. Classical case of Dunning-Kruger effect.

    Reply
  52. Why pretend Mars gravity is a problem of any kind? That is not merely not known, it is not clear even 0g/freefall causes any unacceptable problems.

    Reply
  53. Nope. No chance the body reacts to Mars gravity the same way it doe microgravity/aka freefall. The ISS has nothing to do with it, I’d like to see you point about anyone talking about obese people or heavv shoes the way I think you are implying, although you are not clear really what you are talking about at all.

    Reply
  54. From my perspective of human nature right now is the perfect time to at least start the process. If we wait until we absolutely need to (the elbows-to-elbows state) then it’s already too late. Unfortunately mobilizing humans on a grand scale usually needs a grand push first….

    Reply
  55. No you make the system parallely redundant and put it at the L1 point but offset against the solar wind pressure.It is possible that is what you were thinking and I misunderstood you.

    Reply
  56. From what I learned a few years ago the human body will adapt the lunar gravity more or less like it does to microgravity (not enough stimulus to change otherwise) whereas Mars has enough stimulus to significantly reduce the physiological changes seen in microgravity adaptation. I think you may need to review more current literature.

    Reply
  57. Someone’s salty about Ariane 6 vs. BFR with the former having worse cost/performance over it’s predecessor and the latter having immense operational capability along with planned tests a year before the former.

    Reply
  58. It’s perfectly fine for those that don’t want to participate or even believe or endorse such things not to do it.As long as those who want and can are able to everything will be OK for everyone.

    Reply
  59. That’s not how gravity works. It isn’t an all or nothing deal. Mars isn’t microgravity. We need a variable-g test station in orbit to be sure of what the long term effects are going to be.

    Reply
  60. The military budget spends twice what NASA does for space launch. DARPA ‘Blackjack’ for military LEO projects will support development.

    Reply
  61. Consider the dynamic pressure of solar plasma interacting with a magnetic system large enough to shield Mars. Requires the device to accelerate the plasma to generate the thrust for station-keeping at the libration point; and concurrently divert the plasma around Mars. TANFL!

    Reply
  62. Mr. Rocard belongs to those who believe that others are even more incompetent than he himself is. Classical case of Dunning-Kruger effect.

    Reply
  63. Why pretend Mars gravity is a problem of any kind? That is not merely not known it is not clear even 0g/freefall causes any unacceptable problems.

    Reply
  64. Nope. No chance the body reacts to Mars gravity the same way it doe microgravity/aka freefall.The ISS has nothing to do with it I’d like to see you point about anyone talking about obese people or heavv shoes the way I think you are implying although you are not clear really what you are talking about at all.

    Reply
  65. We didn’t talk about the moon landings. But yeah.. can’t exclude for 100{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} that some of them have their doubts.. . As I said a true madhouse.

    Reply
  66. Self interest, greed and ambition are big human drivers. They have a bad rep, but they are a big reason why many things exist and are done.

    Reply
  67. His point was that even if NASA won’t finance SpaceX, DARPA will. (And NASA’s launcher is just a job program anyway, would they really care if it won’t be used?)

    Reply
  68. Lunar and Martian gravity are not the same thing as microgravity. I mean seriously. Stop beclowning yourself. You’ll be surprised about what people do once the gravity is one sixth. Human powered flight is an option.

    Reply
  69. Bezos has indicated his intention to put at least $1bn into Blue Origin for as long as it takes, whether or not they make money. I’d call that a subsidy of some sort.

    Reply
  70. Ariane exists as a government bureaucracy same as SLS. Ariane will hang around until nobody launches a payload for several years just like SLS.

    Reply
  71. Anonymous, there is no reason to be sad about affairs at Airbus. There is plenty of investment money for fresh approaches outside of the sphere of Airbus. Why don’t you come help at ONESTAGETOSPACE? Artificial gravity, one stage and a half rocket design, aerospike and/or RDE, reusable, wet habitat concept, universal habitats and ready to colonize. It doesn’t require rocket science to combine them in a weight efficient viable configuration. Anyway, it would be nice to broaden my network of people with an ambitious technological vision for Europe. If you know somebody who might be interested to help in any shape or form, and give our project momentum, they are welcome.

    Reply
  72. From my experience, you can’t help someone who doesn’t want to be helped. Glad you got out! Have you tried looking at other relevant companies associated with satellites/electronics?

    Reply
  73. Not exactly. Bezos is selling ULA engines at a price they can’t make them for, but a lot more than Bezos can make them for. It’s win win. And uncle Sam doesn’t have to foot that bill.

    Reply
  74. Self interest greed and ambition are big human drivers.They have a bad rep but they are a big reason why many things exist and are done.

    Reply
  75. His point was that even if NASA won’t finance SpaceX DARPA will.(And NASA’s launcher is just a job program anyway would they really care if it won’t be used?)

    Reply
  76. Lunar and Martian gravity are not the same thing as microgravity.I mean seriously. Stop beclowning yourself.You’ll be surprised about what people do once the gravity is one sixth. Human powered flight is an option.

    Reply
  77. Bezos has indicated his intention to put at least $1bn into Blue Origin for as long as it takes whether or not they make money. I’d call that a subsidy of some sort.

    Reply
  78. Ariane exists as a government bureaucracy same as SLS. Ariane will hang around until nobody launches a payload for several years just like SLS.

    Reply
  79. Anonymous there is no reason to be sad about affairs at Airbus. There is plenty of investment money for fresh approaches outside of the sphere of Airbus. Why don’t you come help at ONESTAGETOSPACE? Artificial gravity one stage and a half rocket design aerospike and/or RDE reusable wet habitat concept universal habitats and ready to colonize. It doesn’t require rocket science to combine them in a weight efficient viable configuration.Anyway it would be nice to broaden my network of people with an ambitious technological vision for Europe. If you know somebody who might be interested to help in any shape or form and give our project momentum they are welcome.

    Reply
  80. From my experience you can’t help someone who doesn’t want to be helped. Glad you got out! Have you tried looking at other relevant companies associated with satellites/electronics?

    Reply
  81. Not exactly. Bezos is selling ULA engines at a price they can’t make them for but a lot more than Bezos can make them for. It’s win win. And uncle Sam doesn’t have to foot that bill.

    Reply
  82. It’s a loss, because it keeps the zombie corporation(one that survives by government subsidy) launching rockets at taxpayer expense. Cut the zombie’s head off by making it compete for business, and let it die a second time. That’s the way real Americans do it!

    Reply
  83. Did the military have a second launch capability before SpaceX? I come to the conclusion that they did not. From Wikipedia “United Launch Alliance (ULA) is a provider of spacecraft launch services to the United States government. It was formed as a joint venture between Lockheed Martin Space Systems and Boeing Defense, Space & Security in December 2006 by combining the teams at the two companies. U.S. government launch customers include the Department of Defense and NASA, as well as other organizations. With ULA, Lockheed and Boeing held a monopoly on military launches for more than a decade until the US Air Force awarded a GPS satellite contract to SpaceX in 2016.” For ten years ULA had a monopoly, yet SpaceX had to plead before congress to be allowed to bid on a launch. That is how desperate the federal government was for a second launcher. Before the gravy train was threatened by good old American style competition, something the fascists that run out government don’t like, there was not a peep about having only one launch option. What does that tell you about the veracity of the government agencies involved? It’s actually worse than that, the US government allowed Boeing, and Lockheed to merge their launch divisions to form ULA, destroying second launch capability. That is how important it was to the feds before their crony gravy train was threatened! In the words of the great economist Murry Rothbard, “Government is nothing more, and nothing less than a bandit gang, writ large.

    Reply
  84. These organizations self justify themselves regardless of their original intent. That is, their real objectives are self preservation and surviving with ever more budget. In that capacity, they will continue launching ridiculously expensive stuff as long as they have some political leverage. Eventually voters and political opportunists will notice how ridiculous it gets and cut the source dry, but it can take a looong time for that to happen.

    Reply
  85. It’s a loss because it keeps the zombie corporation(one that survives by government subsidy) launching rockets at taxpayer expense. Cut the zombie’s head off by making it compete for business and let it die a second time. That’s the way real Americans do it!

    Reply
  86. Did the military have a second launch capability before SpaceX? I come to the conclusion that they did not. From Wikipedia United Launch Alliance (ULA) is a provider of spacecraft launch services to the United States government. It was formed as a joint venture between Lockheed Martin Space Systems and Boeing Defense Space & Security in December 2006 by combining the teams at the two companies. U.S. government launch customers include the Department of Defense and NASA as well as other organizations. With ULA” Lockheed and Boeing held a monopoly on military launches for more than a decade until the US Air Force awarded a GPS satellite contract to SpaceX in 2016.””For ten years ULA had a monopoly”” yet SpaceX had to plead before congress to be allowed to bid on a launch. That is how desperate the federal government was for a second launcher. Before the gravy train was threatened by good old American style competition something the fascists that run out government don’t like there was not a peep about having only one launch option. What does that tell you about the veracity of the government agencies involved? It’s actually worse than that the US government allowed Boeing and Lockheed to merge their launch divisions to form ULA destroying second launch capability. That is how important it was to the feds before their crony gravy train was threatened! In the words of the great economist Murry Rothbard””””””Government is nothing more”” and nothing less than a bandit gang”” writ large.”””””””

    Reply
  87. These organizations self justify themselves regardless of their original intent. That is their real objectives are self preservation and surviving with ever more budget.In that capacity they will continue launching ridiculously expensive stuff as long as they have some political leverage.Eventually voters and political opportunists will notice how ridiculous it gets and cut the source dry but it can take a looong time for that to happen.

    Reply
  88. SpaceX proposes to deploy a LEO constellation of thousands of satellites for a communications network to be known as Starlink. They are the U.S. late-entry in a varied user services provider market. Reserve officer Lt. Commander Paul Thomas recognized the potential military capabilities for a low orbit constellation with resupply capability. These node units have somewhat different capabilities than a typical comm satellite or research package in a low orbital placement. The high launch capacities developed for the LEO communications constellation endeavors, enable a similar military variant system. It will shortly become economical to deploy thousands of system assets in a useful time frame.

    Reply
  89. Wearing a Mars excursion suit will be close in equivalence to the loading of a soldier on Earth, one conducting an extended foot patrol. Plenty of exercise with a raised CG, as with a backpack.

    Reply
  90. SpaceX proposes to deploy a LEO constellation of thousands of satellites for a communications network to be known as Starlink. They are the U.S. late-entry in a varied user services provider market.Reserve officer Lt. Commander Paul Thomas recognized the potential military capabilities for a low orbit constellation with resupply capability. These node units have somewhat different capabilities than a typical comm satellite or research package in a low orbital placement.The high launch capacities developed for the LEO communications constellation endeavors enable a similar military variant system. It will shortly become economical to deploy thousands of system assets in a useful time frame.

    Reply
  91. Wearing a Mars excursion suit will be close in equivalence to the loading of a soldier on Earth one conducting an extended foot patrol. Plenty of exercise with a raised CG as with a backpack.

    Reply
  92. The magnetic field issue is quite easy to solve, believe it or not. Just look up “artificial magnetosphere”.” Easier still to solve: A few meters of dirt above your habitat.

    Reply
  93. ULA using BO engines is a poison pill for ULA. Why not just get the BO engines on a shiny New Glenn? I mean they have been flight tested and certifies by ULA. (Insert Bezos madman laugh here)

    Reply
  94. Did the military have a second launch capability before SpaceX?” Yes absolutely. Boeing (Delta IV heavy), Lockheed Martin (Atlas V). This is a BIG deal to the military.

    Reply
  95. I don’t work in Aerospace but I do know people who work at SpaceX as well as traditional companies that service the launch industry. People at traditional companies are in denial. People at SpaceX need a vacation.

    Reply
  96. I pay something like $27,000 a year in various state taxes. I don’t get anything near that benefit. The best roads I drive on are toll roads that I pay to drive on. Homelessness is rampant and I am generally derided by society as someone with privilege. At a certain point in time moving is economical/cultural. Most my peers have moved to other states, moving to the Moon/Mars is just another move.

    Reply
  97. People on Mars will have basically the same genes. So unless they are going to alter their own genetic structure then they will be the same. Kind of like how all the scrawny kids nowadays with thighs smaller than my calf muscles are basically the same but rail thin due to lack of exercise (whereas I run). Don’t confuse environmental changes with genetic changes.

    Reply
  98. The magnetic field issue is quite easy to solve” believe it or not. Just look up “”artificial magnetosphere””””.””””Easier still to solve: A few meters of dirt above your habitat.”””

    Reply
  99. ULA using BO engines is a poison pill for ULA.Why not just get the BO engines on a shiny New Glenn? I mean they have been flight tested and certifies by ULA. (Insert Bezos madman laugh here)

    Reply
  100. Did the military have a second launch capability before SpaceX?””Yes absolutely. Boeing (Delta IV heavy)”””” Lockheed Martin (Atlas V). This is a BIG deal to the military.”””

    Reply
  101. I don’t work in Aerospace but I do know people who work at SpaceX as well as traditional companies that service the launch industry.People at traditional companies are in denial. People at SpaceX need a vacation.

    Reply
  102. I pay something like $27000 a year in various state taxes. I don’t get anything near that benefit. The best roads I drive on are toll roads that I pay to drive on. Homelessness is rampant and I am generally derided by society as someone with privilege.At a certain point in time moving is economical/cultural. Most my peers have moved to other states moving to the Moon/Mars is just another move.

    Reply
  103. People on Mars will have basically the same genes. So unless they are going to alter their own genetic structure then they will be the same.Kind of like how all the scrawny kids nowadays with thighs smaller than my calf muscles are basically the same but rail thin due to lack of exercise (whereas I run).Don’t confuse environmental changes with genetic changes.

    Reply
  104. Two rockets from the same vendor, namely ULA? ULA had a monopoly for ten years after the merger. The fact they had two models of expendable rocket just mad their launches even more absurdly expensive. If delta, and atlas qualify as two capabilities, would falcon 9, falcon heavy, and BFR qualify as three? Will they let ULA die after falcon 9, and BFR are both available? It seems obvious to me, that the flexibility made possible by having multiple reusable boosters, and later whole reusable rocket stacks will be better than having different rockets that are built to order by one vendor. It won’t be long before SpaceX has enough equipment that they can launch payloads with next to no notice. Once BFR is operating, it could be next day service.

    Reply
  105. By then, (+ 150 years ??) wouldn’t it be reasonable to assume that there would be suitably powered exoskeletons or uploading into androids on Earth.

    Reply
  106. You can probably extrapolate. Here on earth we have a skeletal frame that’s about right for the demands we place on it in a one G environment. In microgravity we shed bone mass at a few percent per month (is it) without exercise. The equilibrium point is probably we end up like jelly fish. i.e. with absolutely no skeletal structure. Because quite simply it’s not required. On Mars, I extrapolate we will end up at around 40% bone mass (of Earth). Equally, long term on a rotating space station is likely to find equilibrium around the same ratio of artificial gravity to Earth gravity. So for 1/2G, go for 50% bone mass (over years of course). 2 weeks holidays aren’t going to be a problem. But staff are going to have to work out daily.

    Reply
  107. They also help themselves to my income without actually doing anything for it. It’s robbery. I have to work for it. They don’t. The hardest part for them is working how much to take off me.

    Reply
  108. There’s probably millions of extinct civilisations in the universe who prioritized building utopian societies over expanding out to the stars. Were the settlers who went west in the USA in the 19th century misguided? They could have stayed behind and made the east a better place to live…

    Reply
  109. People on Mars are going to be naturally selected to better adaptation to Mars. Yes we start with the same genes, but the better adapted genes for Mars will become dominant over time. The process begins from the first generation. The divergence will be stark over only 100 years. People seem to think natural selection requires millions of years to work. Not at all. It requires generational change. Homo Sapiens only existed for 50-100,000 years or so. Before that we were a different species.

    Reply
  110. By then (+ 150 years ??) wouldn’t it be reasonable to assume that there would be suitably powered exoskeletons or uploading into androids on Earth.

    Reply
  111. You can probably extrapolate. Here on earth we have a skeletal frame that’s about right for the demands we place on it in a one G environment. In microgravity we shed bone mass at a few percent per month (is it) without exercise. The equilibrium point is probably we end up like jelly fish. i.e. with absolutely no skeletal structure. Because quite simply it’s not required. On Mars I extrapolate we will end up at around 40{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} bone mass (of Earth). Equally long term on a rotating space station is likely to find equilibrium around the same ratio of artificial gravity to Earth gravity. So for 1/2G go for 50{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} bone mass (over years of course). 2 weeks holidays aren’t going to be a problem. But staff are going to have to work out daily.

    Reply
  112. They also help themselves to my income without actually doing anything for it. It’s robbery. I have to work for it. They don’t. The hardest part for them is working how much to take off me.

    Reply
  113. There’s probably millions of extinct civilisations in the universe who prioritized building utopian societies over expanding out to the stars. Were the settlers who went west in the USA in the 19th century misguided? They could have stayed behind and made the east a better place to live…

    Reply
  114. People on Mars are going to be naturally selected to better adaptation to Mars. Yes we start with the same genes but the better adapted genes for Mars will become dominant over time. The process begins from the first generation. The divergence will be stark over only 100 years. People seem to think natural selection requires millions of years to work. Not at all. It requires generational change. Homo Sapiens only existed for 50-100000 years or so. Before that we were a different species.

    Reply
  115. Are you sure you know how evolution and Natural selection works? 100 years wont change the Martians much genetically. For NS to work fast you need like 98% of the population to die and for the 2% to repopulate to 100% every generation works for organisms that lays a thousand eggs .. But, no Martians wont be evolving as much as you propose as possible.

    Reply
  116. I’m mostly concerned with the heavy lift capability of BFR. That’s what is needed to get exoindustrialization rolling. Puny humans can ride the bottle rockets, like falcon 9. I view colonizing Mars as unlikely, even if it is possible. Sure, there will likely be research outposts on mars, and likely the Jovian moons, sort of like at the south pole. I believe that humanity’s home in space will end up being sort of everywhere, something similar to what Gerard O’Neil envisioned. Not just in the Terra-Luna system, but moving outward, eventually to the Oort, and beyond. If terraforming Mars makes humanity harder to wipe out, lots of independent mobile colonies would make it geometrically more durable. Let’s say there is a impending supernova 100 light years from Sol. LIfe on Earth, and Mars would be wiped out, except maybe deep ocean communities dependent on chemosynthesis. O’Neil colonies with a small amount of delta V could park on the other side of Ceres from the supernova, and be relatively unaffected

    Reply
  117. I agree. Do you think that by then, they’ll be able to select embryos for traits? Another reason they’ll diverge. But if people on Earth will have the same genetic technology and, if interplanetary travel time is fast, and if both peoples can comfortably live on each planet’s surface then no divergence. Those in power(wealth) have access to better genetic technology, and then divergence.

    Reply
  118. I wish Blue Origin all the luck in the world. By all accounts, they have developed a wonderful engine, shame they will be destroyed after one launch. Maybe once Blue Origin is putting people in orbit, ULA can be allowed to die. Likely, the military will decide they need three launch providers, and that for some missions, they prefer a disposable rocket, but not the electron, or it’s successor.

    Reply
  119. Are you sure you know how evolution and Natural selection works? 100 years wont change the Martians much genetically. For NS to work fast you need like 98{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of the population to die and for the 2{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} to repopulate to 100{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} every generation works for organisms that lays a thousand eggs .. But no Martians wont be evolving as much as you propose as possible.

    Reply
  120. I’m mostly concerned with the heavy lift capability of BFR. That’s what is needed to get exoindustrialization rolling. Puny humans can ride the bottle rockets like falcon 9.I view colonizing Mars as unlikely even if it is possible. Sure there will likely be research outposts on mars and likely the Jovian moons sort of like at the south pole. I believe that humanity’s home in space will end up being sort of everywhere something similar to what Gerard O’Neil envisioned. Not just in the Terra-Luna system but moving outward eventually to the Oort and beyond.If terraforming Mars makes humanity harder to wipe out lots of independent mobile colonies would make it geometrically more durable. Let’s say there is a impending supernova 100 light years from Sol. LIfe on Earth and Mars would be wiped out except maybe deep ocean communities dependent on chemosynthesis. O’Neil colonies with a small amount of delta V could park on the other side of Ceres from the supernova and be relatively unaffected

    Reply
  121. I agree. Do you think that by then they’ll be able to select embryos for traits? Another reason they’ll diverge. But if people on Earth will have the same genetic technology and if interplanetary travel time is fast and if both peoples can comfortably live on each planet’s surface then no divergence. Those in power(wealth) have access to better genetic technology and then divergence.

    Reply
  122. I wish Blue Origin all the luck in the world. By all accounts they have developed a wonderful engine shame they will be destroyed after one launch.Maybe once Blue Origin is putting people in orbit ULA can be allowed to die. Likely the military will decide they need three launch providers and that for some missions they prefer a disposable rocket but not the electron or it’s successor.

    Reply
  123. Two rockets from the same vendor namely ULA? ULA had a monopoly for ten years after the merger. The fact they had two models of expendable rocket just mad their launches even more absurdly expensive. If delta and atlas qualify as two capabilities would falcon 9 falcon heavy and BFR qualify as three? Will they let ULA die after falcon 9 and BFR are both available? It seems obvious to me that the flexibility made possible by having multiple reusable boosters and later whole reusable rocket stacks will be better than having different rockets that are built to order by one vendor. It won’t be long before SpaceX has enough equipment that they can launch payloads with next to no notice. Once BFR is operating it could be next day service.

    Reply
  124. Epigenetics–a higher level control function which, without altering underlying genes, alters the expression of the genes to achieve a different result.

    Reply
  125. Yea, he seems to be pretty defensive, which doesn’t bode well for him. I meant whoever wrote this either doesn’t know how to properly craft an article, or just phoned it in hard this time.

    Reply
  126. Epigenetics–a higher level control function which without altering underlying genes alters the expression of the genes to achieve a different result.

    Reply
  127. Yea he seems to be pretty defensive which doesn’t bode well for him. I meant whoever wrote this either doesn’t know how to properly craft an article or just phoned it in hard this time.

    Reply
  128. Initially, yes definitely. But the artificial magnetosphere for terraforming purposes would be a huge bang for the buck.

    Reply
  129. That’s true, but when problems are too far in the future, or are too big to conceptually accept, inaction is hard to change, especially when relatively smaller things are staring us in the face right now.

    Reply
  130. Watch Expanse or read the books Leviathan Wakes etc. It actually does a pretty good job of showing the potential impact of reduced gravity on human physiology.

    Reply
  131. I was talking about the crew facilities. There are indeed some parallels to crew Dragon (less to cargo Dragon), but the specifics may be quite different, since BFS needs to support a much larger crew for a longer duration. By analogy, a yacht is not the same as a lifeboat, though they both can float. Btw, another thing they (or anyone?) haven’t done yet is in-orbit refueling. That’s going to be critical to get the promised performance out of BFS. Without refueling, the payload beyond LEO is much smaller.

    Reply
  132. That’s true but when problems are too far in the future or are too big to conceptually accept inaction is hard to change especially when relatively smaller things are staring us in the face right now.

    Reply
  133. Watch Expanse or read the books Leviathan Wakes etc. It actually does a pretty good job of showing the potential impact of reduced gravity on human physiology.

    Reply
  134. I was talking about the crew facilities. There are indeed some parallels to crew Dragon (less to cargo Dragon) but the specifics may be quite different since BFS needs to support a much larger crew for a longer duration. By analogy a yacht is not the same as a lifeboat though they both can float.Btw another thing they (or anyone?) haven’t done yet is in-orbit refueling. That’s going to be critical to get the promised performance out of BFS. Without refueling the payload beyond LEO is much smaller.

    Reply
  135. Actually, Homo sapiens are over 250,000 years old (up to 500k, depending on how you classify Homo heidelbergensis 300-500k BP) and have undergone little major genetic change since then. Overall, human genetic variation is very low compared with most other mammals, most researchers tie this to a major bottleneck early on that created a “founder effect.” 100k is the typical date for Homo sapiens expansion out of Africa, since it coincides with the Last inter-glacial period and archaeology sites from South Asia indicate initial peopling by Homo sapiens around then.

    Reply
  136. Actually Homo sapiens are over 250000 years old (up to 500k depending on how you classify Homo heidelbergensis 300-500k BP) and have undergone little major genetic change since then. Overall human genetic variation is very low compared with most other mammals most researchers tie this to a major bottleneck early on that created a founder effect.”” 100k is the typical date for Homo sapiens expansion out of Africa”””” since it coincides with the Last inter-glacial period and archaeology sites from South Asia indicate initial peopling by Homo sapiens around then.”””

    Reply
  137. This is another mechanism: HISTONES, Their function is to package DNA into structural units called nucleosomes. Histones are the main proteins in chromatin. Chromatin is a combination of DNA and protein which makes up the contents of a cell nucleus. Because DNA wraps around histones, they also play a role in gene regulation

    Reply
  138. Exactly, human animal is very capable of adaptation. People talking about Mars gravity as some kind of barrier humans cant adopt to simply don’t know much about physiology or genetics.

    Reply
  139. Genes may be same but their expression can be different. There are promoter regions that can activate or deactivate expression as well as other mechanisms to adjust gene expression to the environment.

    Reply
  140. This is Pentagon limitations not Elon’s. Elon has said on numerous occasions that he would be happy to employ people from other countries.

    Reply
  141. This is another mechanism: HISTONES Their function is to package DNA into structural units called nucleosomes. Histones are the main proteins in chromatin. Chromatin is a combination of DNA and protein which makes up the contents of a cell nucleus. Because DNA wraps around histones they also play a role in gene regulation

    Reply
  142. Exactly human animal is very capable of adaptation. People talking about Mars gravity as some kind of barrier humans cant adopt to simply don’t know much about physiology or genetics.

    Reply
  143. Genes may be same but their expression can be different. There are promoter regions that can activate or deactivate expression as well as other mechanisms to adjust gene expression to the environment.

    Reply
  144. This is Pentagon limitations not Elon’s. Elon has said on numerous occasions that he would be happy to employ people from other countries.

    Reply
  145. This is Pentagon limitations not Elon’s. Elon has said on numerous occasions that he would be happy to employ people from other countries.

    Reply
  146. This is Pentagon limitations not Elon’s. Elon has said on numerous occasions that he would be happy to employ people from other countries.

    Reply
  147. This is another mechanism: HISTONES, Their function is to package DNA into structural units called nucleosomes. Histones are the main proteins in chromatin. Chromatin is a combination of DNA and protein which makes up the contents of a cell nucleus. Because DNA wraps around histones, they also play a role in gene regulation

    Reply
  148. This is another mechanism: HISTONES Their function is to package DNA into structural units called nucleosomes. Histones are the main proteins in chromatin. Chromatin is a combination of DNA and protein which makes up the contents of a cell nucleus. Because DNA wraps around histones they also play a role in gene regulation

    Reply
  149. Exactly, human animal is very capable of adaptation. People talking about Mars gravity as some kind of barrier humans cant adopt to simply don’t know much about physiology or genetics.

    Reply
  150. Exactly human animal is very capable of adaptation. People talking about Mars gravity as some kind of barrier humans cant adopt to simply don’t know much about physiology or genetics.

    Reply
  151. Genes may be same but their expression can be different. There are promoter regions that can activate or deactivate expression as well as other mechanisms to adjust gene expression to the environment.

    Reply
  152. Genes may be same but their expression can be different. There are promoter regions that can activate or deactivate expression as well as other mechanisms to adjust gene expression to the environment.

    Reply
  153. This is another mechanism: HISTONES, Their function is to package DNA into structural units called nucleosomes. Histones are the main proteins in chromatin. Chromatin is a combination of DNA and protein which makes up the contents of a cell nucleus. Because DNA wraps around histones, they also play a role in gene regulation

    Reply
  154. Exactly, human animal is very capable of adaptation. People talking about Mars gravity as some kind of barrier humans cant adopt to simply don’t know much about physiology or genetics.

    Reply
  155. Genes may be same but their expression can be different. There are promoter regions that can activate or deactivate expression as well as other mechanisms to adjust gene expression to the environment.

    Reply
  156. Actually, Homo sapiens are over 250,000 years old (up to 500k, depending on how you classify Homo heidelbergensis 300-500k BP) and have undergone little major genetic change since then. Overall, human genetic variation is very low compared with most other mammals, most researchers tie this to a major bottleneck early on that created a “founder effect.” 100k is the typical date for Homo sapiens expansion out of Africa, since it coincides with the Last inter-glacial period and archaeology sites from South Asia indicate initial peopling by Homo sapiens around then.

    Reply
  157. Actually Homo sapiens are over 250000 years old (up to 500k depending on how you classify Homo heidelbergensis 300-500k BP) and have undergone little major genetic change since then. Overall human genetic variation is very low compared with most other mammals most researchers tie this to a major bottleneck early on that created a founder effect.”” 100k is the typical date for Homo sapiens expansion out of Africa”””” since it coincides with the Last inter-glacial period and archaeology sites from South Asia indicate initial peopling by Homo sapiens around then.”””

    Reply
  158. That’s true, but when problems are too far in the future, or are too big to conceptually accept, inaction is hard to change, especially when relatively smaller things are staring us in the face right now.

    Reply
  159. That’s true but when problems are too far in the future or are too big to conceptually accept inaction is hard to change especially when relatively smaller things are staring us in the face right now.

    Reply
  160. Watch Expanse or read the books Leviathan Wakes etc. It actually does a pretty good job of showing the potential impact of reduced gravity on human physiology.

    Reply
  161. Watch Expanse or read the books Leviathan Wakes etc. It actually does a pretty good job of showing the potential impact of reduced gravity on human physiology.

    Reply
  162. I was talking about the crew facilities. There are indeed some parallels to crew Dragon (less to cargo Dragon), but the specifics may be quite different, since BFS needs to support a much larger crew for a longer duration. By analogy, a yacht is not the same as a lifeboat, though they both can float. Btw, another thing they (or anyone?) haven’t done yet is in-orbit refueling. That’s going to be critical to get the promised performance out of BFS. Without refueling, the payload beyond LEO is much smaller.

    Reply
  163. I was talking about the crew facilities. There are indeed some parallels to crew Dragon (less to cargo Dragon) but the specifics may be quite different since BFS needs to support a much larger crew for a longer duration. By analogy a yacht is not the same as a lifeboat though they both can float.Btw another thing they (or anyone?) haven’t done yet is in-orbit refueling. That’s going to be critical to get the promised performance out of BFS. Without refueling the payload beyond LEO is much smaller.

    Reply
  164. Actually, Homo sapiens are over 250,000 years old (up to 500k, depending on how you classify Homo heidelbergensis 300-500k BP) and have undergone little major genetic change since then. Overall, human genetic variation is very low compared with most other mammals, most researchers tie this to a major bottleneck early on that created a “founder effect.” 100k is the typical date for Homo sapiens expansion out of Africa, since it coincides with the Last inter-glacial period and archaeology sites from South Asia indicate initial peopling by Homo sapiens around then.

    Reply
  165. Epigenetics–a higher level control function which, without altering underlying genes, alters the expression of the genes to achieve a different result.

    Reply
  166. Epigenetics–a higher level control function which without altering underlying genes alters the expression of the genes to achieve a different result.

    Reply
  167. Yea, he seems to be pretty defensive, which doesn’t bode well for him. I meant whoever wrote this either doesn’t know how to properly craft an article, or just phoned it in hard this time.

    Reply
  168. Yea he seems to be pretty defensive which doesn’t bode well for him. I meant whoever wrote this either doesn’t know how to properly craft an article or just phoned it in hard this time.

    Reply
  169. Are you sure you know how evolution and Natural selection works? 100 years wont change the Martians much genetically. For NS to work fast you need like 98% of the population to die and for the 2% to repopulate to 100% every generation works for organisms that lays a thousand eggs .. But, no Martians wont be evolving as much as you propose as possible.

    Reply
  170. Are you sure you know how evolution and Natural selection works? 100 years wont change the Martians much genetically. For NS to work fast you need like 98{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of the population to die and for the 2{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} to repopulate to 100{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} every generation works for organisms that lays a thousand eggs .. But no Martians wont be evolving as much as you propose as possible.

    Reply
  171. I’m mostly concerned with the heavy lift capability of BFR. That’s what is needed to get exoindustrialization rolling. Puny humans can ride the bottle rockets, like falcon 9. I view colonizing Mars as unlikely, even if it is possible. Sure, there will likely be research outposts on mars, and likely the Jovian moons, sort of like at the south pole. I believe that humanity’s home in space will end up being sort of everywhere, something similar to what Gerard O’Neil envisioned. Not just in the Terra-Luna system, but moving outward, eventually to the Oort, and beyond. If terraforming Mars makes humanity harder to wipe out, lots of independent mobile colonies would make it geometrically more durable. Let’s say there is a impending supernova 100 light years from Sol. LIfe on Earth, and Mars would be wiped out, except maybe deep ocean communities dependent on chemosynthesis. O’Neil colonies with a small amount of delta V could park on the other side of Ceres from the supernova, and be relatively unaffected

    Reply
  172. I’m mostly concerned with the heavy lift capability of BFR. That’s what is needed to get exoindustrialization rolling. Puny humans can ride the bottle rockets like falcon 9.I view colonizing Mars as unlikely even if it is possible. Sure there will likely be research outposts on mars and likely the Jovian moons sort of like at the south pole. I believe that humanity’s home in space will end up being sort of everywhere something similar to what Gerard O’Neil envisioned. Not just in the Terra-Luna system but moving outward eventually to the Oort and beyond.If terraforming Mars makes humanity harder to wipe out lots of independent mobile colonies would make it geometrically more durable. Let’s say there is a impending supernova 100 light years from Sol. LIfe on Earth and Mars would be wiped out except maybe deep ocean communities dependent on chemosynthesis. O’Neil colonies with a small amount of delta V could park on the other side of Ceres from the supernova and be relatively unaffected

    Reply
  173. I agree. Do you think that by then, they’ll be able to select embryos for traits? Another reason they’ll diverge. But if people on Earth will have the same genetic technology and, if interplanetary travel time is fast, and if both peoples can comfortably live on each planet’s surface then no divergence. Those in power(wealth) have access to better genetic technology, and then divergence.

    Reply
  174. I agree. Do you think that by then they’ll be able to select embryos for traits? Another reason they’ll diverge. But if people on Earth will have the same genetic technology and if interplanetary travel time is fast and if both peoples can comfortably live on each planet’s surface then no divergence. Those in power(wealth) have access to better genetic technology and then divergence.

    Reply
  175. I wish Blue Origin all the luck in the world. By all accounts, they have developed a wonderful engine, shame they will be destroyed after one launch. Maybe once Blue Origin is putting people in orbit, ULA can be allowed to die. Likely, the military will decide they need three launch providers, and that for some missions, they prefer a disposable rocket, but not the electron, or it’s successor.

    Reply
  176. I wish Blue Origin all the luck in the world. By all accounts they have developed a wonderful engine shame they will be destroyed after one launch.Maybe once Blue Origin is putting people in orbit ULA can be allowed to die. Likely the military will decide they need three launch providers and that for some missions they prefer a disposable rocket but not the electron or it’s successor.

    Reply
  177. Two rockets from the same vendor, namely ULA? ULA had a monopoly for ten years after the merger. The fact they had two models of expendable rocket just mad their launches even more absurdly expensive. If delta, and atlas qualify as two capabilities, would falcon 9, falcon heavy, and BFR qualify as three? Will they let ULA die after falcon 9, and BFR are both available? It seems obvious to me, that the flexibility made possible by having multiple reusable boosters, and later whole reusable rocket stacks will be better than having different rockets that are built to order by one vendor. It won’t be long before SpaceX has enough equipment that they can launch payloads with next to no notice. Once BFR is operating, it could be next day service.

    Reply
  178. Two rockets from the same vendor namely ULA? ULA had a monopoly for ten years after the merger. The fact they had two models of expendable rocket just mad their launches even more absurdly expensive. If delta and atlas qualify as two capabilities would falcon 9 falcon heavy and BFR qualify as three? Will they let ULA die after falcon 9 and BFR are both available? It seems obvious to me that the flexibility made possible by having multiple reusable boosters and later whole reusable rocket stacks will be better than having different rockets that are built to order by one vendor. It won’t be long before SpaceX has enough equipment that they can launch payloads with next to no notice. Once BFR is operating it could be next day service.

    Reply
  179. By then, (+ 150 years ??) wouldn’t it be reasonable to assume that there would be suitably powered exoskeletons or uploading into androids on Earth.

    Reply
  180. By then (+ 150 years ??) wouldn’t it be reasonable to assume that there would be suitably powered exoskeletons or uploading into androids on Earth.

    Reply
  181. You can probably extrapolate. Here on earth we have a skeletal frame that’s about right for the demands we place on it in a one G environment. In microgravity we shed bone mass at a few percent per month (is it) without exercise. The equilibrium point is probably we end up like jelly fish. i.e. with absolutely no skeletal structure. Because quite simply it’s not required. On Mars, I extrapolate we will end up at around 40% bone mass (of Earth). Equally, long term on a rotating space station is likely to find equilibrium around the same ratio of artificial gravity to Earth gravity. So for 1/2G, go for 50% bone mass (over years of course). 2 weeks holidays aren’t going to be a problem. But staff are going to have to work out daily.

    Reply
  182. You can probably extrapolate. Here on earth we have a skeletal frame that’s about right for the demands we place on it in a one G environment. In microgravity we shed bone mass at a few percent per month (is it) without exercise. The equilibrium point is probably we end up like jelly fish. i.e. with absolutely no skeletal structure. Because quite simply it’s not required. On Mars I extrapolate we will end up at around 40{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} bone mass (of Earth). Equally long term on a rotating space station is likely to find equilibrium around the same ratio of artificial gravity to Earth gravity. So for 1/2G go for 50{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} bone mass (over years of course). 2 weeks holidays aren’t going to be a problem. But staff are going to have to work out daily.

    Reply
  183. They also help themselves to my income without actually doing anything for it. It’s robbery. I have to work for it. They don’t. The hardest part for them is working how much to take off me.

    Reply
  184. They also help themselves to my income without actually doing anything for it. It’s robbery. I have to work for it. They don’t. The hardest part for them is working how much to take off me.

    Reply
  185. There’s probably millions of extinct civilisations in the universe who prioritized building utopian societies over expanding out to the stars. Were the settlers who went west in the USA in the 19th century misguided? They could have stayed behind and made the east a better place to live…

    Reply
  186. There’s probably millions of extinct civilisations in the universe who prioritized building utopian societies over expanding out to the stars. Were the settlers who went west in the USA in the 19th century misguided? They could have stayed behind and made the east a better place to live…

    Reply
  187. People on Mars are going to be naturally selected to better adaptation to Mars. Yes we start with the same genes, but the better adapted genes for Mars will become dominant over time. The process begins from the first generation. The divergence will be stark over only 100 years. People seem to think natural selection requires millions of years to work. Not at all. It requires generational change. Homo Sapiens only existed for 50-100,000 years or so. Before that we were a different species.

    Reply
  188. People on Mars are going to be naturally selected to better adaptation to Mars. Yes we start with the same genes but the better adapted genes for Mars will become dominant over time. The process begins from the first generation. The divergence will be stark over only 100 years. People seem to think natural selection requires millions of years to work. Not at all. It requires generational change. Homo Sapiens only existed for 50-100000 years or so. Before that we were a different species.

    Reply
  189. The magnetic field issue is quite easy to solve, believe it or not. Just look up “artificial magnetosphere”.” Easier still to solve: A few meters of dirt above your habitat.

    Reply
  190. The magnetic field issue is quite easy to solve” believe it or not. Just look up “”artificial magnetosphere””””.””””Easier still to solve: A few meters of dirt above your habitat.”””

    Reply
  191. ULA using BO engines is a poison pill for ULA. Why not just get the BO engines on a shiny New Glenn? I mean they have been flight tested and certifies by ULA. (Insert Bezos madman laugh here)

    Reply
  192. ULA using BO engines is a poison pill for ULA.Why not just get the BO engines on a shiny New Glenn? I mean they have been flight tested and certifies by ULA. (Insert Bezos madman laugh here)

    Reply
  193. Did the military have a second launch capability before SpaceX?” Yes absolutely. Boeing (Delta IV heavy), Lockheed Martin (Atlas V). This is a BIG deal to the military.

    Reply
  194. Did the military have a second launch capability before SpaceX?””Yes absolutely. Boeing (Delta IV heavy)”””” Lockheed Martin (Atlas V). This is a BIG deal to the military.”””

    Reply
  195. I don’t work in Aerospace but I do know people who work at SpaceX as well as traditional companies that service the launch industry. People at traditional companies are in denial. People at SpaceX need a vacation.

    Reply
  196. I don’t work in Aerospace but I do know people who work at SpaceX as well as traditional companies that service the launch industry.People at traditional companies are in denial. People at SpaceX need a vacation.

    Reply
  197. I pay something like $27,000 a year in various state taxes. I don’t get anything near that benefit. The best roads I drive on are toll roads that I pay to drive on. Homelessness is rampant and I am generally derided by society as someone with privilege. At a certain point in time moving is economical/cultural. Most my peers have moved to other states, moving to the Moon/Mars is just another move.

    Reply
  198. I pay something like $27000 a year in various state taxes. I don’t get anything near that benefit. The best roads I drive on are toll roads that I pay to drive on. Homelessness is rampant and I am generally derided by society as someone with privilege.At a certain point in time moving is economical/cultural. Most my peers have moved to other states moving to the Moon/Mars is just another move.

    Reply
  199. People on Mars will have basically the same genes. So unless they are going to alter their own genetic structure then they will be the same. Kind of like how all the scrawny kids nowadays with thighs smaller than my calf muscles are basically the same but rail thin due to lack of exercise (whereas I run). Don’t confuse environmental changes with genetic changes.

    Reply
  200. People on Mars will have basically the same genes. So unless they are going to alter their own genetic structure then they will be the same.Kind of like how all the scrawny kids nowadays with thighs smaller than my calf muscles are basically the same but rail thin due to lack of exercise (whereas I run).Don’t confuse environmental changes with genetic changes.

    Reply
  201. SpaceX proposes to deploy a LEO constellation of thousands of satellites for a communications network to be known as Starlink. They are the U.S. late-entry in a varied user services provider market. Reserve officer Lt. Commander Paul Thomas recognized the potential military capabilities for a low orbit constellation with resupply capability. These node units have somewhat different capabilities than a typical comm satellite or research package in a low orbital placement. The high launch capacities developed for the LEO communications constellation endeavors, enable a similar military variant system. It will shortly become economical to deploy thousands of system assets in a useful time frame.

    Reply
  202. SpaceX proposes to deploy a LEO constellation of thousands of satellites for a communications network to be known as Starlink. They are the U.S. late-entry in a varied user services provider market.Reserve officer Lt. Commander Paul Thomas recognized the potential military capabilities for a low orbit constellation with resupply capability. These node units have somewhat different capabilities than a typical comm satellite or research package in a low orbital placement.The high launch capacities developed for the LEO communications constellation endeavors enable a similar military variant system. It will shortly become economical to deploy thousands of system assets in a useful time frame.

    Reply
  203. Wearing a Mars excursion suit will be close in equivalence to the loading of a soldier on Earth, one conducting an extended foot patrol. Plenty of exercise with a raised CG, as with a backpack.

    Reply
  204. Wearing a Mars excursion suit will be close in equivalence to the loading of a soldier on Earth one conducting an extended foot patrol. Plenty of exercise with a raised CG as with a backpack.

    Reply
  205. I was talking about the crew facilities. There are indeed some parallels to crew Dragon (less to cargo Dragon), but the specifics may be quite different, since BFS needs to support a much larger crew for a longer duration. By analogy, a yacht is not the same as a lifeboat, though they both can float.

    Btw, another thing they (or anyone?) haven’t done yet is in-orbit refueling. That’s going to be critical to get the promised performance out of BFS. Without refueling, the payload beyond LEO is much smaller.

    Reply
  206. It’s a loss, because it keeps the zombie corporation(one that survives by government subsidy) launching rockets at taxpayer expense. Cut the zombie’s head off by making it compete for business, and let it die a second time. That’s the way real Americans do it!

    Reply
  207. It’s a loss because it keeps the zombie corporation(one that survives by government subsidy) launching rockets at taxpayer expense. Cut the zombie’s head off by making it compete for business and let it die a second time. That’s the way real Americans do it!

    Reply
  208. Did the military have a second launch capability before SpaceX? I come to the conclusion that they did not. From Wikipedia “United Launch Alliance (ULA) is a provider of spacecraft launch services to the United States government. It was formed as a joint venture between Lockheed Martin Space Systems and Boeing Defense, Space & Security in December 2006 by combining the teams at the two companies. U.S. government launch customers include the Department of Defense and NASA, as well as other organizations. With ULA, Lockheed and Boeing held a monopoly on military launches for more than a decade until the US Air Force awarded a GPS satellite contract to SpaceX in 2016.” For ten years ULA had a monopoly, yet SpaceX had to plead before congress to be allowed to bid on a launch. That is how desperate the federal government was for a second launcher. Before the gravy train was threatened by good old American style competition, something the fascists that run out government don’t like, there was not a peep about having only one launch option. What does that tell you about the veracity of the government agencies involved? It’s actually worse than that, the US government allowed Boeing, and Lockheed to merge their launch divisions to form ULA, destroying second launch capability. That is how important it was to the feds before their crony gravy train was threatened! In the words of the great economist Murry Rothbard, “Government is nothing more, and nothing less than a bandit gang, writ large.

    Reply
  209. Did the military have a second launch capability before SpaceX? I come to the conclusion that they did not. From Wikipedia United Launch Alliance (ULA) is a provider of spacecraft launch services to the United States government. It was formed as a joint venture between Lockheed Martin Space Systems and Boeing Defense Space & Security in December 2006 by combining the teams at the two companies. U.S. government launch customers include the Department of Defense and NASA as well as other organizations. With ULA” Lockheed and Boeing held a monopoly on military launches for more than a decade until the US Air Force awarded a GPS satellite contract to SpaceX in 2016.””For ten years ULA had a monopoly”” yet SpaceX had to plead before congress to be allowed to bid on a launch. That is how desperate the federal government was for a second launcher. Before the gravy train was threatened by good old American style competition something the fascists that run out government don’t like there was not a peep about having only one launch option. What does that tell you about the veracity of the government agencies involved? It’s actually worse than that the US government allowed Boeing and Lockheed to merge their launch divisions to form ULA destroying second launch capability. That is how important it was to the feds before their crony gravy train was threatened! In the words of the great economist Murry Rothbard””””””Government is nothing more”” and nothing less than a bandit gang”” writ large.”””””””

    Reply
  210. These organizations self justify themselves regardless of their original intent. That is, their real objectives are self preservation and surviving with ever more budget. In that capacity, they will continue launching ridiculously expensive stuff as long as they have some political leverage. Eventually voters and political opportunists will notice how ridiculous it gets and cut the source dry, but it can take a looong time for that to happen.

    Reply
  211. These organizations self justify themselves regardless of their original intent. That is their real objectives are self preservation and surviving with ever more budget.In that capacity they will continue launching ridiculously expensive stuff as long as they have some political leverage.Eventually voters and political opportunists will notice how ridiculous it gets and cut the source dry but it can take a looong time for that to happen.

    Reply
  212. Self interest, greed and ambition are big human drivers. They have a bad rep, but they are a big reason why many things exist and are done.

    Reply
  213. Self interest greed and ambition are big human drivers.They have a bad rep but they are a big reason why many things exist and are done.

    Reply
  214. His point was that even if NASA won’t finance SpaceX, DARPA will. (And NASA’s launcher is just a job program anyway, would they really care if it won’t be used?)

    Reply
  215. His point was that even if NASA won’t finance SpaceX DARPA will.(And NASA’s launcher is just a job program anyway would they really care if it won’t be used?)

    Reply
  216. Lunar and Martian gravity are not the same thing as microgravity. I mean seriously. Stop beclowning yourself. You’ll be surprised about what people do once the gravity is one sixth. Human powered flight is an option.

    Reply
  217. Lunar and Martian gravity are not the same thing as microgravity.I mean seriously. Stop beclowning yourself.You’ll be surprised about what people do once the gravity is one sixth. Human powered flight is an option.

    Reply
  218. Bezos has indicated his intention to put at least $1bn into Blue Origin for as long as it takes, whether or not they make money. I’d call that a subsidy of some sort.

    Reply
  219. Bezos has indicated his intention to put at least $1bn into Blue Origin for as long as it takes whether or not they make money. I’d call that a subsidy of some sort.

    Reply
  220. Ariane exists as a government bureaucracy same as SLS. Ariane will hang around until nobody launches a payload for several years just like SLS.

    Reply
  221. Ariane exists as a government bureaucracy same as SLS. Ariane will hang around until nobody launches a payload for several years just like SLS.

    Reply
  222. Anonymous, there is no reason to be sad about affairs at Airbus. There is plenty of investment money for fresh approaches outside of the sphere of Airbus. Why don’t you come help at ONESTAGETOSPACE? Artificial gravity, one stage and a half rocket design, aerospike and/or RDE, reusable, wet habitat concept, universal habitats and ready to colonize. It doesn’t require rocket science to combine them in a weight efficient viable configuration. Anyway, it would be nice to broaden my network of people with an ambitious technological vision for Europe. If you know somebody who might be interested to help in any shape or form, and give our project momentum, they are welcome.

    Reply
  223. Anonymous there is no reason to be sad about affairs at Airbus. There is plenty of investment money for fresh approaches outside of the sphere of Airbus. Why don’t you come help at ONESTAGETOSPACE? Artificial gravity one stage and a half rocket design aerospike and/or RDE reusable wet habitat concept universal habitats and ready to colonize. It doesn’t require rocket science to combine them in a weight efficient viable configuration.Anyway it would be nice to broaden my network of people with an ambitious technological vision for Europe. If you know somebody who might be interested to help in any shape or form and give our project momentum they are welcome.

    Reply
  224. From my experience, you can’t help someone who doesn’t want to be helped. Glad you got out! Have you tried looking at other relevant companies associated with satellites/electronics?

    Reply
  225. From my experience you can’t help someone who doesn’t want to be helped. Glad you got out! Have you tried looking at other relevant companies associated with satellites/electronics?

    Reply
  226. Not exactly. Bezos is selling ULA engines at a price they can’t make them for, but a lot more than Bezos can make them for. It’s win win. And uncle Sam doesn’t have to foot that bill.

    Reply
  227. Not exactly. Bezos is selling ULA engines at a price they can’t make them for but a lot more than Bezos can make them for. It’s win win. And uncle Sam doesn’t have to foot that bill.

    Reply
  228. No, you make the system parallely redundant and put it at the L1 point but offset against the solar wind pressure. It is possible that is what you were thinking, and I misunderstood you.

    Reply
  229. No you make the system parallely redundant and put it at the L1 point but offset against the solar wind pressure.It is possible that is what you were thinking and I misunderstood you.

    Reply
  230. From my perspective of human nature, right now is the perfect time to at least start the process. If we wait until we absolutely need to (the elbows-to-elbows state), then it’s already too late. Unfortunately, mobilizing humans on a grand scale usually needs a grand push first….

    Reply
  231. From my perspective of human nature right now is the perfect time to at least start the process. If we wait until we absolutely need to (the elbows-to-elbows state) then it’s already too late. Unfortunately mobilizing humans on a grand scale usually needs a grand push first….

    Reply
  232. From what I learned a few years ago, the human body will adapt the lunar gravity more or less like it does to microgravity (not enough stimulus to change otherwise), whereas Mars has enough stimulus to significantly reduce the physiological changes seen in microgravity adaptation. I think you may need to review more current literature.

    Reply
  233. From what I learned a few years ago the human body will adapt the lunar gravity more or less like it does to microgravity (not enough stimulus to change otherwise) whereas Mars has enough stimulus to significantly reduce the physiological changes seen in microgravity adaptation. I think you may need to review more current literature.

    Reply
  234. Someone’s salty about Ariane 6 vs. BFR, with the former having worse cost/performance over it’s predecessor, and the latter having immense operational capability along with planned tests a year before the former.

    Reply
  235. Someone’s salty about Ariane 6 vs. BFR with the former having worse cost/performance over it’s predecessor and the latter having immense operational capability along with planned tests a year before the former.

    Reply