How Dangerous is Deep Space Travel to Mars and Beyond ?

NASA has a mission protocol which says that if a Low Earth Orbit mission increases the lifetime risk of the crew getting cancer by more than 3% they won’t go ahead with it but the upcoming mars missions may expose the crews to levels that would be beyond that limit and other hazards, so how dangerous is deep space travel to Mars and beyond.
Patreon : / curiousdroid
Paypal.me : www.paypal.me/curiousdroid
You can now translate this and other curious droid videos, see my video about it here • Curious Droid KZbin ...
With Elon Musk pushing to get men on Mars by the mid 2020’s and NASA looking to do the same for the 2030’s, just how much have we learned since Apollo and from the space stations.
50 years on from the beginning of the Apollo missions and we have yet to send any man back to the moon let alone on the much more arduous journey to our nearest viable planet Mars.
Now whilst much of this has been lack of political will in the face of our own manmade problems here on earth, it’s also down to the increasing sophistication of robotic probes and landers and that they are much cheaper to make, launch, can go where no man could and can continue working for sometimes years at a time, the Voyager probes are still going 40 years after their launch. If we relied on manned discovery only we would know a fraction what we do now.
With data from the probes which we have sent around the solar system since then, we have built up a picture which is far from the vision of just whizzing through inter planetary space. That and along with the joint NASA Russian experiment of having men in space for a year onboard the ISS, we now have a much better understanding of what they may experience on the two and half year round trip to Mars.
Title: Adam Are You Free?zz
Author: P C III
Source: www.pipechoir.com
Nightingale sounds from Gerry Gutteridge flic.kr/ps/Mk2zU
License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0

[@rudyossanchez]

I love the quality of your content. thank you.

[@SN2D]

same, much details and you really feel the depth of the res earch

[@talha6199]

rudyossanchez. i really like the background music.

[@MarcusBadi]

ME2

[@VodkaFanClub]

I absolutely agree!

[@kjpmitch]

Ros In

[@Joe-uo9wv]

I watched Neil & Buzz walk on the Moon and at 68 I would love to be around to watch a Mars landing mission before I go to my by, by.

[@jacobjorgenson9285]

And what would the point being? Coffee does not grow in Mars! Solve that problem first

[@jshepard152]

I'm 45 and don't expect to see it.

[@pleasepermitmetospeakohgre1504]

@ Joe I hate to be the bearer of bad news but I have to inform you that apollo 11 was in fact a hoax. Many videos have been made over the years that expose the whole thing.

[@Realbillball]

@@pleasepermitmetospeakohgre1504 I hate (well, not really) to break it to you, but you are boring and need to educate yourself.

[@kylecalobtraceharper]

@@pleasepermitmetospeakohgre1504 yeah if it was faked the russians would've exposed America if they faked it. They were tracking them the whole way.

[@jmccarthy40]

We're not ready We're decades if not centuries away from being ready.

[@rfresh1011]

James McCarthy I agree 100%

[@pedrodiaz5540]

Bottom line, unless we can create a space ship whit artificial gravity capability ,a magnetic field or a shield to protect the crew from the intense radiation of out space and of course capable of maintaining a decent speed , we humans have only one space ship to travel through deep space,That is space ship Earth.

[@CreepsCompilation]

You comment to thoughtful and rational.. Why do you think there is such a mad rush and sudden push to colonize Mars? Dr. AUGUST Dunning estimates the cost over 21 trillion.. For want reason would we spend that kind of money?

[@jakemcclintock8696]

Bottom line: With thinking like that, we'd never have made it to the Moon. It takes courage to tackle the next big challenge. The reason our space program was all but sidelined was small-minded people who believed we should stick to earthbound concerns because of all the problems we face here. I repeat the above observation, and in fact, we'd still be in Europe wondering if the earth was flat or round and the Vikings and Columbus never would have discovered the New World, nor guys like Magellan and Cook have circumnavigated the Earth. Not only must we explore the entire solar system, which is chock full of mysteries and opportunities, we must go beyond this small part of the galaxy to fully explore the Milky Way, and then, go outside of it to fully explore the Local Group. In it, we are already flying away from the rest of Creation at breakneck speed, and who knows what lies beyond its relatively limited environs. Man does not progress by playing it chicken.

[@CreepsCompilation]

@@jakemcclintock8696 Going to the moon was done by the organized, wealthy, unified, and mostly stable society that existed in the 1950s and early 1960s. Look around you Jake, our country can't even govern itself any longer, our debt now exceeds our GDP and everything that binds us together as a country is in the process of being destroyed. But, other than that, sure let's jack each other off in a CAN on a dead planet while our own society burns.. By the way, I use to be an optimist about humanity's future growing up, but I honestly think we need our best minds to focus on our immediate problems FIRST..

[@joycheriakkara]

@@CreepsCompilation We are destroying Earth as fast we can. Se we need to colonize some other planet.

[@edoedo8686]

So so agree.

[@eldruidacosmico]

Your videos have great quality. I really enjoy how you present topics that few people wonder about, yet you are able to keep the interrest.

[@andreassonne8004]

To fly to Mars, we need 2 things: Artificial gravity (by centrifugal forces) and good shielding, and we need to do it like this even if it means more money and extra weight. It makes no sense to send men to their deaths only for a couple of days/weeks on Mars, that will not be a succes. Sending them to Mars and getting them back in perfect health is the real achievement.

[@DrWhom]

I think this is so much harder than people generally seem to think it is.

[@davidgeisler9885]

I don’t think the centrifugal force concept is anywhere near realistic outside the movies, at least in the next few decades. From what I’ve read written by the experts.

[@jcollin]

which is not possible

[@hrvojebozic614]

@@davidgeisler9885 what are the biggest issues with making centrifugal force type of rotating craft while being propelled with conventional engine?

[@Orion2525]

We know how to do this but it means more complexity/mass/fuel/money

[@GroupCaptain-LionelMandrake]

I think it’s fair to say that we are a long way off being able to safely do deep space travel.

[@robertplatt8376]

Robots do the same thing at 1% the cost. Plus nobody is out at risk.

[@fakiirification]

not really a long way off. all the technology exists to do it safely. Its just a political hurdle to get over to justify the expense. TBH private sector should be allowed and encouraged to develop space technology and technique of the future. NASA is redundant and no longer really necessary. The political cycle makes them work too slow, and in spurts of 4-8 years between changing goals of administrations. of course private sector requires profit motive to do things. So i say lets change our backwards attitudes on things like mining and changing other bodies. Allow claims to be placed on parts of other planets. We should logically be encouraging off-world resource harvesting from the moon, asteroids, mars etc, in order to preserve the earth. We should stop looking at our planet as just a rock, and instead treat it as our house. The rest of the solarsystem is the rocks we need to exploit.

[@Midnight20]

fakiirification pretty much if we imagined for a second that everything was free, than we’d probably already be on mars on the moon already, etc. Our technology would be that 10 times than it is now. Space technology is very very expensive, probably some of the most expensive equipment/tools on Earth.

[@francom6230]

@@Midnight20 the human greed is the only holdup to anything we are capable of.. imo

[@foty8679]

@@GAVACHO5150 If you built the space craft in space, weight is not really a problem.

[@krakatau123]

Thank you - this, and all your other videos are very good to watch. No frills, no artificial excitement - just pure content, delivered gracefully.

[@yepperdeedooda]

My mom keeps telling me I should be an astronaut because all I do is take up space.

[@d1rtymart1n18]

Ксения Ковалевская Your mom is awesome.

[@whys]

Ксения Ковалевская 👏👏👏👏

[@splintcell22]

I got plenty of space at my place.

[@ottopike737]

why Muslims specifically?

[@phantompower]

MrHappyBollox Funny how you are offended by Greg Skies comment, and to wish his daughters were raped, I mean an act immeasurably worse than his comment, that destroys innocent girls, you wish that upon them, It really shows what a piece of human garbage you are.

[@seanb3516]

KZbin has given Science Communicators an excellent platform to work on. Thank you for your excellent content and professional delivery.

[@PCthesecond]

I think we should be aiming to have a lunar colony first. Having people live on the moon is good practice before Mars. With the moon being so close. The window to come home is always open and there is nearly instant communication/support from Earth. The things learned from the moon and the resources there would aid in going to Mars. But it doesn’t capture the publics excitement like mars does we’ve already gone.

[@tihamerrozman7504]

I do agree that people are not so excited about a new manned lunar mission, but I am super excited, like everyone here, I think :)

[@rolfwienr371]

its easier to start with mars

[@PCthesecond]

rolf winnberg how so?

[@rolfwienr371]

@@PCthesecond www.mars-one.com/faq/mission-to-mars/why-mars-and-not-another-planet

[@PCthesecond]

rolf winnberg the link you sent is more comparing Mars to other planets, namely Venus and Mars is obviously a better choice than Venus, yes there are a lot more resources on Mars than the Moon. But that doesn’t mean the Moon is lacking in them and it doesn’t make it any easier to get to Mars in the first place.

[@wizzardofpaws2420]

Forget that. He convinced me. There's no way I'm going to Mars.

[@jshepard152]

Life on Mars is going to suck.

[@RavingFan]

Mars doesn't have enough gravity, so bones turn to chalk and muscles atrophy

[@jshepard152]

@@RavingFan Yup. No air. Toxic soil. Freezing cold. I hope our would be colonists are INDOORSEY.

[@davidsoom1551]

Elon Musk said he was going to send himself to the moon. He backed out on that one but still says he wants to go to Mars. Is he a genius.

[@RavingFan]

walk on moon is weekly excursion, mars trip is 100x longer, 100x more hazardous.

[@MrStarTraveler]

Your videos are the only ones I like to re-watch. I love the way you talk. And the background music of this particular video was plain awesome.

[@outdatedtank4542]

MrStarTraveler ive watched his vids dozens each Love it

[@karlpj1]

I come only because the 👕

[@cesteres]

It's the shirts.

[@JavierBonilla78]

Great video my friend! Keep going!

[@AmitMishra-bt9vu]

Just randomly saw your channel .The contents are really amazing.I deeply appreciate your work.

[@p00pie]

Sometimes knowing too much is a curse. If early explorers knew all of the dangers facing them they would never have gone.

[@carlosantuckwell]

Great presentation. Long periods of zero-G, and light-weight shielding make such a flight too dangerous. However, I read every book on space and spaceflight in my high school library in the late 1960's -- they all mentioned various forms of nuclear drive: 'plasma pinch' was the most efficient I seem to recall. Recently, I've been reading some of Stanton Friedman's books. He was an applied nuclear physicist who worked on nuclear rocket engines for various US companies sponsored by the US Atomic Energy Commission and NASA's "Space Nuclear Propulsion Office" -- this work was done throughout the 1960's but was mysteriously cancelled by the US Govt, even though the Los Alamos Phoebus 1B (very near in size to the Apollo Command Module, so not that big) developed a thrust of 4,400 Megawatts. The efficiency of such nuclear propulsion means that the space craft could be accelerated constantly at 1G (+9.8 metres per second every second) all the way to the half way point, shut down for the short amount of time to yaw the engines over so that they point ahead (then becoming retro-rockets), and have them decelerating at 1G for the rest of the journey. Such efficiency is the only way to go -- it would enable thicker shielding, it would provide Earth gravity for over 95% of the trip, and it would shorten the trip drastically from the old explosive chemical rockets which, soon after leaving Earth orbit, having used up their fuel quota, they have to coast most of the way (it's that coasting that results in zero-G). (Stanton T. Friedman, "Flying Saucers and Science" (New Page Books 2008), Chapter 2: You Can Get Here From There, pp.75-80 Note: these were working engines, NOT fusion, which hasn't been harnessed yet.

[@akizeta]

It wasn't a "mysterious" cancellation; it was dropped because NASA's budget was reduced and they needed all their money to fly Apollo. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERVA#Loss_of_political_support_and_cancellation

[@Sennmut]

Since when do government agencies worry about costs, and reduce spending? The ships, crew, and equipment was already budgeted or paid for, and ready to go. Alot of it ended up either on Skylab, or the Apollo-Soyuz flight.

[@carlosantuckwell]

Plenty of times governments say they have to cut funds to certain areas (but never 'tax breaks' or 'incentives' for big business, unless they're getting serious about challenging private ownership of our economy).

[@jonathanclarke5878]

Many people have flown missions as long or longer than a flight to or from Mars without ill effect. Every IUS mission is such a flight. We dont need new shielding. Good structural design and distribution to supplies will provide adequate radiation shielding.

[@johnwang9914]

+forestsoceansmusic The idea of a 1-g acceleration for half the trip followed by a 1-g deceleration for the other half was a common one for the 1950's but even for a nuclear thermal propelled spaceship, it's not feasible as even a nuclear propulsion system requires propellant and existing NTR designs just weren't that efficient with propellant use. Even the Project Orion external nuclear pulse propulsion concept did not have continuous propulsion for the entire proposed Mars trip (the issue wasn't propellant with that project but with the number of atomic bomblets that were needed). The NASA NERVA engine suffered significant structural damage to the solid fuel rods used in it's core from the vibration and used a lot of propellant for it's thrust, it's hardly efficient enough for a full 1-g acceleration mission. A better model would be the ARE reactor from 1954 developed for the US airforce atomic bomber (the subsequent 60 MWatt Fireball reactor and the final proposed 200 MWatt engine were never built but the ARE test reactor operated successfully for many years) but that would also not have the propellant efficiency necessary for a complete 1-g mission to Mars. You really can't just look up the old 1950's and 1960's ideas verbatim, even if they were rehashed in a recent book. Besides, nuclear propulsion only mitigates the risks by reducing the trip time and as the greatest radiation hazard would be during a solar storm, it's still quite the risk considering how often such storms occur. However, with enough material, you could not only shield effectively from radiation and micrometeorites but you could also assemble a spaceship strong enough for full 1-g artificial gravity by centrifugal (centripetal) force. The trick is to get that material into space which is extremely expensive if launched from Earth which is why we haven't built a space station with artificial gravity. However, as the Moon only has 4% of the Earth's mass, launching material out of the Moon's gravity well is insignificant compared with launching from Earth. Smelting, refining and manufacturing though possible is a bit of a problem but as the primary use of the mass would be for radiation and micro-meteorite shielding, simply lunar soil would suffice, quite literally, all that's needed are sand bags.

[@JasonAnthonyDJ]

Great video mate, very informative! Keep them coming.

[@cameronturner7475]

Go to the moon first! Spend a year or two on the moon to prove that it can be done then we'll talk.

[@domxem5551]

As if they would talk to you and ask for your opinion

[@cameronturner7475]

@@domxem5551 oh they don't need my opinion, they need my money. I vote and I vote no, until they satisfy my conditions.

[@MaynardGKrebs-gv4vy]

@@cameronturner7475 What is the point? We have been to the moon 6 times...

[@cameronturner7475]

Establish a colony. To get to Mars is going to require an extended travel period outside the protection of the magnetosphere. Orbit the moon for three years to show it can be done. That way if something goes wrong it's only a short trip back to earth. To get to Mars and return is going to require living on Mars for an extended period. Is going to require an artificial habitat capable of supporting humans for that time. Do a proof of concept trip to the moon. The years all self supporting, no resupply. Spend two years orbiting and a year on the surface. Test all of the ideas, make sure everything works first. That's what they did when they went to the moon in the first place. They didn't just take off because someone made a movie and everyone thought it looked cool.

[@MaynardGKrebs-gv4vy]

@@cameronturner7475 Your problem is money for this. Left wingers will balk at any spending on what they will probably perceive as a waste of time and risk to life. I have been a lifetime supporter of space exploration but I can't imagine what putting humans on Mars will accomplish that robotic devices can't. Are we going just because it's there? If I thought there was a cure for cancer on Mars, I might be for it. There are PLENTY of things we can spend the money here on Earth that needed tending to before we go to another planet that is clearly uninhabitable for the near future.

[@germans1]

That's it you just talked me out of any space travel no matter how bad it gets in earth. Good luck to those who choose to do it.

[@afgjoeable]

Love your videos man. So much informative and learning experience gets easy.

[@mathewdallaway]

Nicely done. Informative and interesting. Thank you.

[@straatman12345]

Very well thought out videos, love watching these! Good work!

[@chibuzorazuka8543]

Nice and educative video. Thank you very much for this. Just when I was thinking of Space Tourism being a giant leap... But we need to find a way of turning this around. There is always a way.

[@calebrepairtech]

One of the most informative space related channels around. Thank you.

[@themetalstickman]

"Space is disease and danger, wrapped in darkness and silence."

[@phil6bien]

(Oops, never trust editing on a phone, copy it first, grrr!)... ...And a big waste of time, especially when spending billions to send people in a test tube craft, in a lifeless environment...for not such, as a breath of air. I'll try fixing my thoughts later, by-golly-me.

[@777jones]

I think the major priority is to get billions of people off my planet and away from stuff I want.

[@JordanZ25]

@@phil6bien I don't think it'll take too long for Earth to fit that description of space. If we stop looking for a backup plan, we may wish we hadn't in the not so distant future.

[@phil6bien]

@@JordanZ25 ~> if we can't make it here, on this "very hospitable planet," HOW IN BLOODY HELL do you or anybody think we could flourish and prosper anywhere else!? It's total madness, all is in vain, and for nothing, as little will come of it all! Science is fun, but there should be limits, and I think they've passed it by far and by leaps and bounds!? That said, if private companies what to experiment, let them do it till their socks falls off and get their toes tickled by some wild cats, while they're at it, if they want, but governments involvement should be kept to a minimum, as there's never much wisdom with that group!!! Now, beam me up Scotty!

[@JordanZ25]

@@phil6bien we have the technologies to use a planets natural resources with minimum impact to the environment, the problem is that the vast infrastructure here on Earth is far from environmentally friendly. We have the ability to fix this but because of things like greed, it's gonna be a long time before we can continue to inhabit the earth while positively impacting it. We don't NEED it, yet, but a fresh planet to start from scratch with, knowing what we know and having the abilities we have now is seemingly less daunting than replacing the infrastructure underneath our feet. Again, we don't need it today, but some day we will.

[@KMCDM]

I love the quality of your shirts!! Thank you..

[@TomTimeTraveler]

All of the problems associated with a manned flight to Mars are limiters. One of the most important factors is the overall time/speed factor. A round trip of three years is simple too long. New propulsion systems need to be developed to significantly reduce travel (and exposure) time. The surface of Mars, like to Moon, is dusty with radiation another huge factor. It would be a huge undertaking that we may not be quite ready for.

[@theninearemine8499]

We won't ever be ready for. 1) There is absolutely nothing to be gained from the trip except bragging rights. This is the same reason we have not been back to the Moon. 2) There are so... so... so many more things that make it impossible and scientists know it... but they are trying to keep their jobs so they omit those details. Like the part about Mars being 100% toxic to all life, not just human. And that when the humans get there, they won't even be able to walk... and there is no recovery, their condition will only get worse. Oh! and centrifugal force doesn't work either to imitate Earth's gravity. Scientists know that too. Unless you can make a ring 61Km wide.

[@johnballs1352]

@@theninearemine8499 the American people wanna put people on Mars, NASA is paid with taxpayers money so there's your reason.

[@ehbr6679]

We have the means for a 4 month transfer to Mars but that would require about 5km/s of delta V for our TMI burn. This would leave less energy for correction burns though so we better ensure nothing screws up. 8 month transfer is a minimum energy transfer, which is great with inanimate objects, not so for people.

[@bohkory2690]

We dont need rhetoric, we need BOH. Watch the PowerPoint and vote. drive.google.com/file/d/17h4Aq6u9yQmdXDhUIxYFyhmhcKECQj9g/view

[@davidodonovan4982]

There'll be no such thing as a round trip as you put it. Anyone that volunteers for a Mars mission won't be coming back to Earth..

[@edwardgituku134]

Awesome job Mr.. Keep them coming

[@linabayoumi1655]

paul

[@johnadan3509]

That’s Simple we’re not ready yet 🤷‍♂️ got to try short journeys first, go the moon first🙏

[@CreepsCompilation]

Exactly, also, why the damn rush and push all about? Continue sending robots, cheap and safe.. Keep researching close to home..

[@sebastianc4787]

Indeed, we should make a hub in the moon first to have some experience colonising before we go further , in any case if something goes wrong , the moon is very close in space distance.

[@NikkyElso]

We did, 50 years ago. We've taken all the baby steps. We've gone to the moon, we've landed equipment safely on the Martian surface, we've seen what the effects of long term habitation in micro gravity does on the ISS amd what we have to do to counter it, now we just have to take the leap and send humans to mars.

[@sebastianc4787]

@@NikkyElso but iss is not mars. The moon should be next logical place to colonise. Not too far , not too close and we can harvest resources to go further than mars.

[@alphagt62]

Exactly, there’s no point in sending dead people to Mars. We need to invent the shielding, and get the speed up, before we try to go anywhere. I remember an old Star Trek show, where they were warping across space, and came across a hundred year old ship, with all the occupants in stasis, they had caught up to them in a few days, of their hundred year trip. They should have just waited.

[@stormtrooper4204]

brilliant channel. I just binge watched about thirty of your videos. Simply fantastic!

[@anandsd1975]

As usual. top notch content quality. Easily one of the best in KZbin.

[@BD12]

This is a cool channel

[@mikeadams6179]

yes Barry but I got to remember it's all syfy

[@mjag2834]

+Mike Adams There may be a way to grow limbs and organs in a lab, as well as being put into cryostasis. Who knows.

[@vocalcords7397]

I know words, I have the best words. Nobody respects women more than me. I am the least racist person who you have ever met. Nobody lies better than me. Believe me. Sad!

[@ronschlorff7089]

yes, cool as a nice summer's day on Mars!!

[@KerryCronic]

lots of things to consider when doing these types of missions for sure.

[@stephenirwin2761]

Nicely done Paul!

[@HOLLYWOODUNAPOLOGETIC]

Another well done video. Thank you!

[@KevinGerhart1701]

One thing Kerbal Space Program has taught me; weight matters in space. While it is correct that a shielded, and therefore heavy spacecraft is expensive and difficult to get into orbit (as Curious Droid mentioned). It is also an issue in terms of Delta V once in orbit. To send that craft to Mars, the cost in propellant goes up as the weight of the craft increases. So it will be a real balancing act to protect the crew, yet not make the craft so heavy that it can't carry sufficient propellant to meet the objectives. Disclaimer: If you are a moon hoax or flat earth troll, please move on to another post.

[@Vector_Ze]

Mass Weight

[@mjag2834]

Must be a way to reflect radiation by using reactors to repel the offending radiation?!

[@anonymike8280]

@Kevin Gerhart Who gave you the right to tell other people what opinions to have or not have? People believe things that are not true and that just the way it is. Deal with it. Maybe even you believe some things that are not true and are not even aware of it. Myself, I find flat Earth videos entertaining but I don't believe them. Moon hoax? I have considered, the astronauts may have been doing something there that government did not want us to know about, and that therefore studio-created video was shown to cover for it. One thing that is very clear in my mind is that if some part of the moon landing was not as it was represented, the Soviets would have said nothing. The success of the Apollo program got them out of the expensive and scientifically useless Moon race. Both the low Earth orbit program and the unmanned Solar System explorations program were far more useful. Be real. If the astronauts were conducting secret scientific and military experiments or cataloging artificial ruins or debris, why would the Soviets have wanted to admit we could do something they couldn't? Some things are just secret.

[@LuisSoto-ho5fw]

And the evidence for this is....?

[@neiladlington950]

As a long lived space enthusiast I have evolved a change of heart. Something about a Mars mission frustrates me to no end. When I was a kid I was excited about the moon landings but like many people, after a while it felt pointless. Took me a while to realize the reason why I felt so.... because it was pointless. A lot of money just to plant a flag and then run off. Mars will be the same thing. These are all "STATEMENT! missions". "WE conquered this!", "WE were here!", etc. I'm not against us leaving this planet and colonizing alien environments but these sorts of manned missions are frustratingly counter productive and expensive. The ISS is typical of this; an answer looking for a question; a mission looking for a REAL reason to exist. If it were up to me I would start first with establishing the long term reasons for all of this; our long term goal. Is our long term goal about landing a man on Mars? Or is our long term goal to make humanity into an extraterrestrial civilization? What is the appropriate AND dramatic steps towards that end? Again if it were up to me it would be something like establishing a permanent "way station"; someplace "WE LEAVE FROM" rather than "WE GO TO". A first generation bridge between "terrestrial space crafts" escaping earth's atmosphere and "extra-terrestrial space crafts". A space-port, an assembly plant, a smaller version of Wernher von Braun's orbiting space station wheel, etc. That to me would make me feel like humanity is TRULY moving forward. Remember, there are a lot of us that know that landing on Moon or Mars is no guarantee and no confirmation that we are a space faring civilization as our fifty year absence from anyplace outside low Earth orbit proves.

[@ljdean1956]

First off, I can understand your concerns here. I struggle with it a lot. But we didn't just plant a flag and run. We had long range plans for the moon and Mars but if anything, we ran from further funding because critics successfully argued that we would better spend the money on Earthly problems. Can you name one problem that has been solved by the deep budget cuts following Apollo? Mars exploration will not be the same thing so long as we do not engage in a political pissing contest. Discovery of life on Mars would be the discovery of the ages and would far surpass any flag planting motives. Mars exploration is also different from the moon because of sheer distance and the time it takes to do a round trip. Wasteful even to the hard core space buff! Finding life on Mars will not take place with just a single mission unless we get extraordinarily lucky. If we find life on Mars, it basically proves life is common in the universe and gives further reasons to explore space. I can't think of anything more important for NASA to focus on. But there are some other areas to focus on, and we should be capable of focusing on several major areas. Why should space exploration focus on just one area while other agencies multitask goals they have proven they cannot accomplish even as they get more money? Talk about pointless. What about pointless wars to enrich the billionaire oil club? Wars that promise we will be at war for the rest of our existence as a nation? In any case, our half century absence is due to NASA budgets that cannot keep up with even small amounts of inflation over time. Do you think the DOD could work with a 1960 level budget? NASA should make economizing Low Earth Orbit (LEO), or what was known as Cheap Access To Space (CATS) in the 1990s, it's foremost priority. Even the private sector should emphasize this rather than Mars. But keep Mars in site as the next step beyond LEO, especially if we do economize LEO. We have allowed HSF critics to corral us supporters into a situation where they say space is a waste, then underfund it so they can say "See, we told you it was a waste!".

[@Zamolxes77]

ISS estimated cost: 150 billions USD. How much do you think all that will cost ? Trillions. Many of them. Nobody would be willing to pay for that, because when it comes to economics, we're neanderthals, employing archaic tools like: money, profit and greed.

[@TwitchCronos100]

150 billion USD is nothing if you know how much they spend yearly on just the military, it's insane.

[@davecarvell]

All of the major systems you see in modern missions were present in Apollo. The calculations needed were manageable with that level of technology.

[@peterzpictstube]

Thanks for stating my sentiments very well. No defined purpose other than to say we can. Mars is not a realistic place to colonize.

[@spiroschazapis4108]

Excellent content, one of the best channels on KZbin. Keep it up!

[@jmose1911]

Bravo Mr. Shillito! Many thanks for your time and effort.

[@konsul2006]

Thanks for keeping it real.

[@antonioblunt3703]

Absolutely intriguing!!!

[@davidwilburn6314]

Thx for the insight and perspective. :)

[@felixthecat3n2]

Make more please! You're so good at what you do that we all want more Sir!

[@montylc2001]

Sir, you make great videos.....and where do you get those fantastic shirts!!

[@hannes0000]

Humans need to evolve more on tech ,not fighting each other and wasteing resources and time.

[@edwardlamar3650]

It would be nice, but it will never happen!!!

[@doubleaught7540]

Just anither delusional public schools snowflake

[@edwardlamar3650]

@@doubleaught7540 learn how to spell public school snowflake!!!!

[@johnballs1352]

@@doubleaught7540 you're a loser dude

[@alphatrion100]

@@doubleaught7540 trump voter alert!

[@harrietharlow9929]

Very interesting video. Thank you for posting!

[@kushanpancholi1027]

Sir, I have to say, not just your content, but also your choice of shirts, IS DAMN RIGHT AWESOME!!!!!!

[@awuma]

3:08 Great comment about "plastics with a high hydrogen content" as radiation shielding material. Other plastics also do well.

[@sufinaga]

BS! Cosmic Rays??????

[@petehague9233]

Its true. Very roughly, cosmic rays ping off hydrogen atoms and lose some of their energy (good) whereas they undergo nuclear reactions with aluminium atoms that generate additional radiation sometimes in excess of that which they absorb through collisions (bad to very bad)

[@johnwang9914]

+awuma As hydrocarbons, all plastics have high hydrogen content and it's materials with high hydrogen contents that do well with respect to their mass against high kinetic energy subatomic particle bombardment such as cosmic rays and the solar particles in the solar wind and in solar storms. That's why they said they weren't as effective against ionizing radiation such as gamma rays in the video and why they showed the cross section of a habitat which used water as the radiation shielding medium as water also has a high hydrogen content (as well as being something that you have to carry along anyways). The danger with thin metal shielding is the spalling of secondary particles which can actually increase the number of high kinetic energy bombardment, however metals do have a denser cross section to obstruct radiation hence thin metal shielding (high Z rating) is often paired with laminates of lower Z rating in what's called gradient Z shielding which improves the shielding effectiveness against cosmic and solar radiation by about 60%, the hope of z-shielding is that the secondary particles would have lower kinetic energies and be more easily absorbed, dispersed or deflected by the lower z material.

[@johnwang9914]

+Pero Perhan The Apollo missions used the service module as a shadow shield to block solar radiation just by pointing the rear of the spaceship to the Sun. They also selected a trajectory which minimized the time spent in the Van Allen Radiation belt and scheduled the missions for quiet periods of solar activity. Thin sheets of aluminum are very poor shielding against the high kinetic energy particles of solar radiation and cosmic rays, indeed the high velocity protons and electrons tend to spall other high energy particles off the aluminum thereby increasing the radiation risk. As mass is expensive to launch into space and costs fuel to propel, the radiation shielding was almost always mass that had to be carried for other purposes such as the fuel, oxygen, water, engine and other supplies in the service module., Even the proposals for a manned Mars mission proposed using supplies and waste as shielding, one of the plans for a Mars mission solar storm shelter involved detaching floor, wall and ceiling plates to build the shelter with all the lab equipment and furniture stacked around the shelter.

[@zephsmith3499]

+John Wang thanks for the constructive & interesting reply. That (or sometimes nothing) is the best response to people like Pero. If they are latched up on some conspiracy theory or mentally orbiting around planet Dunning-Krueger, directly challenging them is a waste of one's time, and beyond boring to other readers. If they are not too far gone (or if one has misread their tone), they may actually appreciate and learn. Meanwhile, in any case, providing real information is much more interesting to other readers who are tired of low grade antagonism. And it might help some folks who are not already too badly latched up to avoid being pulled in to the (metaporic) strange attractors of conspiracy theory and confirmation bias.

[@GreasyKing]

Ships with appropriate long-term protection should be assembled (final assembly) in space or on a moon base. We should not be sending humans on such long trips with such horrible exposure rates. While we wait for an appropriate moon-base assembly facility, send robots everywhere we can as scouts.

[@Marsbonfire007]

Greasy King But once you land on the moon to do the assembly, how do you take off again?

[@cenzoredworld]

I agree, and it is far more plausible. People have an industrial age mindset when it comes to space. It's not working out that way, and will not in the future. Need new technologies to protect humans for any meaningful human space travel. So why not utilize AI robotics?

[@sufinaga]

BS! What Shielding? Lead????????

[@vpheonix]

+EMAN67 Lead shielding wouldn't be appropriate. Experiments have shown that particle radiation hitting lead can emit harmful X-rays so lead shielding could actually be hazardous to the astronauts.

[@filthyanimal874]

Virgil Pheonix NASA should use asbestos in the ship's hull to shield the crew from radiation. 😎 Bet no one thought about that!

[@birukaregu2798]

My number one KZbin channel! Keep up the good work Sir, I love science!

[@usedcarsokinawa]

Your videos, presence and voice are great!

[@FrancisFurtak]

It would be an amazing trip but I'll take my chances here on earth!

[@placo10100]

I think the risk verses the reward is negligible when we can design machines to do it for us until we overcome the obvious problems with our technology

[@memezoffuckery3207]

It takes about 5 to 20 minutes to send a single to Mars, and our AI is mostly scripted with hardly any intelligence to operate by themselves.

[@charlesdesaintlaurent5957]

Really love your presentation

[@russellinman3464]

Impressive video! Thank you.

[@iasimov4195]

I suspect it is less dangerous to go to Mars and establish an outpost than it was to travel from Europe to North America and establish a colony during the early 17th century. If Mankind avoided all risks during its history, we'd all still be living in Africa (the horrors!) or be extinct.

[@Nirvanexus]

I don't think it's less dangerous than establishing those colonies. Yeah they didn't have the technology we have now. But they had an option for easy food if they ran out of their own food supply (fishing). They had fresh air to breathe and their only real worries on the travel towards the location, were getting lost at sea, sinking and thus probably drowning, as well as mutiny, sickness or running out of water. The dangers of travelling in deep space are far greater. You can't breathe outside your spacecraft, which is probably a very confined space. If your oxygen machine breaks and you can't find a fix soon, you'll suffocate and die. You need to have plenty of food and water with you, since restocking isn't an option. You are thousands to millions of miles away from any sort of help. If you get into a dispute with your crewmembers, which none of you can seem to resolve, you wont be able to get away. You have to live right beside them. With no private space. The radiation that surrounds you will only be partially blocked by the shield. You'll still be likely to die earlier if you survive the trip in the first place. If a system error happens, you're as good as dead. If your craft can't land, you're as good as dead. If you can't set up the base, you're as good as dead. If something happens with your base, good luck with surviving on a planet with no life what so ever. If you can't take of again after the mission, you're pretty much dead. If your rover gets stuck in something, far away from the base, you're also pretty much dead. If your spacecraft or base gets damaged while you're there and it needs to be repaired, but you don't have the parts, then you need to wait about 2½ more years in order for those parts to arrive, thus further decreasing your chances at suriving the trip. And your body is accustomed to the Earth. Anything else than that will spawn a whole separate doctor education of problems with the body, in order to get treatments. Basicly anything can kill you at any moment and without any warning what so ever. You're screwed from the moment you leave the Earth.

[@ageusaf25]

The two aren't even comparable. You're talking a journey of thousands of miles on a ship on a livable world, compared to a journey of millions of miles in cramped space craft across the inhospitable bleakness of space, in which anything going wrong can mean certain death.

[@johnwang9914]

This is why we should do a moon base first. Not only would that test the technology needed where re-supply missions are possible but material can be gathered from the Moon to act as radiation and micrometeorite shielding. Literally sandbags of lunar material would suffice as shielding so the smelting, refining and manufacturing would not need to be advanced but the smelting of iron and aluminum is quite possible as well as synthesizing plastics from the dry ice and water we know exists on the Moon. With enough material, artificial gravity due to centrifugal force also becomes practical. But of course, a moon base would not grab as much public attention as a Mars mission so we're likely to just do a foolish dangerous hot shot run to Mars.

[@1invag]

John Wang going to the moon was a pretty darn foolishly dangerous hot shot mission in the first place lol. Personally I agree with you moon base first would make way more sense, but I don't think that'd be any less risky in of itself. It'd just make getting to mars easier regularly once it was established

[@dougmc666]

Did they discover a iceberg on the moon and I didn't hear about it? If you get your ingot of moon aluminum, what good is it?

[@reinerwilhelms-tricarico344]

Build a robot colony on Mars. Let them build nicely shielded housing. In the meantime wait until we have the technology to fly to Mars in 6 weeks, not 6 months. Then it may be ok to bring humans there.

[@srennielsen680]

Very good video!

[@olivier-pierredebelmont.3630]

Do you remembet the early sailors?they suffer from scorbut and plenty other ailments....but they continue and learn how to cope with that.It is always risky to go in the unknown.Sir,your vids are GREAT !!!!!

[@anonb4632]

Olivier-pierre De Belmont Yep, but sailors had breathable air wherever they went and Earth gravity...

[@rickkwitkoski1976]

Scorbut??? Scurvy, rickets and various other dietary ailments, yes. And long stretches of bad water unless it rained. They had their own problems to deal with and their non-understanding of what was causing them. But they carried on by mostly dumping the dead guys overboard and recruiting new ones. There is always risk as you say but hopefully by today we have determined how to mitigate much of the risk.

[@jakemarcus9999]

Great video. Thanks!

[@fastfast2]

Absolutelly fantastic video! Great, hugh job. 100% interesting and stimulating for my brain!

[@eagle___shadow]

Nice explanation 🙂👍

[@theinterfaithshepherd9075]

I learn so much from these videos...thank you! I didn't even know about Galactic cosmic rays and Gamma radiation! I thought that the main danger was Solar radiation esp in the event of solar flares. Sometimes I feel like the probability of life elsewhere is small. But, in our own solar system, 2 almost identical planets exist. If Mars had liquid water on it's surface like Earth, they'd be very, very similar...and in universal terms they are virtually identical! Therefore, it seems to make sense that if TWO almost identical planets exist in our OWN solar system...there MUST be others out there!

[@donaldgodin3491]

Is it not kind of a miracle, that we have everything on earth to produce life and maintain it, at least for a while, but absolutely nothing of this, anywhere around us! I think it's worth asking the question: Is there a Creator to this place?

[@mediamattersismycockholste562]

It's "You're all gonna DIE" dangerous :)

[@Bitterrootbackroads]

I remember watching a video, maybe one of yours, that dealt with the problems and consequences of sickness & going to the bathroom on Apollo, Shuttle, and ISS. That was enough to convince me we may never get to Mars.

[@onionknight2239]

Another great one

[@erikandersson1647]

Spend the extra coin and assemble a massive orbital ship with a vast solar array, gravity centrifuge and water shielding on a permanent orbit between earth and mars. This would ferry people back and forth and only need to be accelerated once to reach the proper orbit. Elon's Starship's would simply need to carry the occupants to this ferry at the right time and dock for the journey, let the occupants enjoy the spacious ferry for the long trip, then depart when the time is right.

[@GlowShow5113]

Jeez you make it sound so simple lol. That would have to be built on Earth, flown to space and assembled. And something of that magnitude, would take hundreds of shuttles, hundreds of trips, as well as hundreds of astro-construction workrrs., And mission controls crews for each flight and re-entry. I love the idea, but I think it's a bit out of reach - for now anyway

[@shamaafrin4031]

@@GlowShow5113 🙂 it can be done ,only if countries stop spending money on wars

[@dalethornton8777]

Ewwwww I like that idea!!!

[@dalethornton8777]

@@GlowShow5113 And it would still only represent a small amount of the total budget. We have been brainwashed to believe that these projects are not doable if you want health care, welfare, roads, bridges......this is all a bunch of BS.

[@GlowShow5113]

@@dalethornton8777 well I can't speak on the existence of unknown information. I do agree with you, the government hides almost everything from everyone- only God knows what they know, and what they are actually capable of. I still don't see why my statement is incorrect. This would take 50-75 yrs or more to complete. And would be a logistical nightmare if attempted from earth. They need to get the moon base established first. Then begin building the factory for the tools and supplies - we are years away from all that.

[@hoanu8183]

My opinion is to leave spacetravel (with our current technology) to drones.

[@dalethornton8777]

I agree, however some maned trips are necessary just to prove we can do it. We need ships that can spin some gravity for long term trips.

[@michaeltaylor8835]

Or more advanced races

[@dalethornton8777]

@@michaeltaylor8835 more advanced races will never communicate with us lil peeons. It will have to be attempted the hard way. And yeah, it will just be a feeble attempt, but very satisfying non the less. Maybe these so called advanced races will learn to be attracted to earth women instead of just their wives. Id be glad to share.

[@dalethornton8777]

@@michaeltaylor8835 kzbin.info/www/bejne/fmSTiqyde996nJY

[@professordanfurmanek3732]

Outstanding video! If we are to leave the Cradle these are all valid considerations. Overcomeable yes but also daunting!

[@nrcg2317]

Excellent video.

[@platinum7482]

you should apply for a gest spot on Tom Scott's KZbin channel.

[@1314pankaj]

Mr Snek *guest

[@alphabetagammaxyz]

Why do you say that???

[@julianbermejo3162]

no step on snek

[@thejay8963]

MrHappyBollox Aww, it's a tea fanboy!

[@bigtoe0341]

As much as I would like to see us go to Mars during my lifetime, I now know that we have some very difficult challenges to overcome before we do so. Thank You for the great work.

[@donaldgodin3491]

Why would you like it so much? Would you have a more happy life? Would that solve any problem you have on this earth. Would you be healthier? I don't get it.

[@bigtoe0341]

@@donaldgodin3491 It would give us a chance to work together to overcome the challenges of making a living in a planet which is alien to our way of life on Earth.

[@donaldgodin3491]

@@bigtoe0341 We already have a planet that has been created for life to thrive. Why would any man want to live on another planet? How and why, would it be any better, should it happen? In any case, nobody will live on another planet, cause the Creator of this place has already made escaping our planet an impossiblility. Plus, our own governments already want to get rid of 95% of the world's population. This is 7,500,000,000 people! The chances to work together, as you say, does not look good. Promises of living on another planet, are lies from our World governments. With all the environmental, political, and food problems we have right now worldwide, nobody is gone fly to another earth, somewhere in space. People will need to work together to find solutions to the problems we are facing right here, first. And that's gone be a very hard task. If not impossible!

[@orlandovazquez8694]

This video was extremely informative. I always knew there was risks going to Mars just not to this extent. I never knew just how strong cosmic radiation could be. I always thought astronauts had these problems figured out. Thank you Curious Droid for putting this all into perspective. Great video.

[@patrolpilot3756]

I lived a year and a half in a 32ft. camper while flying out of an airstrip in BFE Louisiana. Nearest town was twenty three miles away. I almost lost my mind. As close to space travel as I ever want to get.

[@dhardy6654]

Why didnt you just fly out of a better airport? WTF!

[@spinoff55]

Isn't anyone talking about artificial (simulated) gravity anymore? I'm surprised that none of the Mars missions envision craft that utilizes centrifugal force. Maybe too expensive? Too risky? Maybe we simply lack the tech?

[@BW022]

Size, weight, and costs already make artificial gravity unlikely. F=mv^2/r. Unfortunately, there is a massive difference in the g's between your feet and head unless the radius is fairly large. For example, a 5m radius craft spinning at 14rpm gives about 1g at your feet and only 0.6g at your feet. It is completely disorienting and humans can't function in those conditions -- you can't walk, if you sit/bend/stand suddenly you get dizzy, etc. The only way to avoid this is to make a much larger craft (20m+ radius or so). This puts it several times the size of the ISS just to get a 4m radius wheel at over 120m long. You then have the issues of a much large surface area which needs to be shielded and the fact that the more weight on the outside of a wheel, the more solid the inside of the wheel needs to be meaning more mass and fuel to get there.

[@5000mahmud]

Use two BFR's, use tethers to connect them, spin them.

[@BW022]

Unfortunately... not stable unless solid. If there is any movement within the BRFs... the system will tumble off its access of rotation. Example - kzbin.info/www/bejne/eIGwm5aEYth1gJY

[@5000mahmud]

BW022 wont the tethers act solid due to tension? its what gemini attempted once right?

[@BW022]

No. Even if the tether was solid , you have the issue. Look at it from the side. A---o---B whirling away like looking at a record on a record player at eye level. Except, A is hollow and someone walks from the center to the top (peak). Center of mass is now slightly off-center. The system reacts by tumbling. It gets worse because the system can only correct itself ever X second. You get this is a solid disk or ring also. The only way this isn't an issue if is the mass is so large relative to the moving mass. Disks and solid records are less affected by this and a really long cylinder barely notices it.

[@arguspanoptes9510]

would graphene be any use in forming a barrier against cosmic rays, or am I wrong?

[@paulkazjack]

Yes you are wrong.

[@arguspanoptes9510]

@@paulkazjack really?

[@paulkazjack]

@@arguspanoptes9510 yup.

[@joristeirlinck3460]

Very interesting. Thank you very much!

[@DanTaylorZa]

Great vids

[@Mystakaphoros]

"brain damage similar to the onset of dementia" OMG GUYS REN AND STIMPY WERE RIGHT SPACE MADNESS IS REAL

[@scottbrooklyn2995]

You want to covet my I've cream sandwich

[@alphatrion100]

Do you have to keep tapping like that? You bloated sack of proto plasm!

[@alphatrion100]

@@scottbrooklyn2995 i have had this icecreambar since i was a child ! People always trying to take it from me!

[@MrDegsy69]

Em Miller older men would be favoured for the mission over young women due to the reduced cancer risk. I can hear the indignant cries of sexism from here. Old guys rule yet again! 😂😂😂

[@Ephesians-ts8ze]

It is not I who am crazy. It is I who am MAAAAAAADDDD!!!

[@bobbybansal]

"nothing will happen if you're wearing one of my shirts" - i swear he said that

[@tomanderson848]

I've come to expect excellence from the Droid.

[@sasquatchiangorilla8061]

Great content

[@duran9664]

I wouldn’t mind dying in a long trip in space for science. I’ll sign a waiver. Can this give me better chance to qualify as an astronaut 🤔

[@CreepsCompilation]

Go for it dude, while you're spending the rest of your life withering away in a CAN on a dead planet, I will think of you fondly as I drink a cold beer in my swimming pool on a beautiful sunny day..

[@JustGimmicks]

@@CreepsCompilation the future does not belong to the faint hearted, it belongs to the brave

[@CreepsCompilation]

@@JustGimmicks How about BRAVELY facing the endless problems we already have HERE and NOW.. Look around dude.. There is a Marxist ideology is tearing the world apart RIGHT NOW.. The world we actually live in, our very freedoms are under DIRECT ASSAULT.. Bravery is REQUIRED NOW...

[@JustGimmicks]

@@CreepsCompilation i dont dosagree with i was just quoting the Regan challenger speech

[@JustGimmicks]

@@CreepsCompilation actually to be clear I do disagree with your political views im thinking but I can understand where you're coming from i guess

[@petyrkowalski9887]

The risk is worth the reward. We spend trillions on defence and useless wars and squander billions on political vanity projects. We are explorers as a species and the tech spin offs from a Mars mission would be massive. Lets think big, bold and do it. There are risks, but sailing, flying, driving, even cycling and walking have risks. When you compare these to radiation risks in space they become less significant relatively.

[@maxattenborough4356]

'Useless wars'? Well, we could just surrender to our enemies I suppose, instead of fighting them. A bit awkward if all they want to do is kill you though ...

[@petyrkowalski9887]

Max Attenborough yep, like Vietnam and Iraq...how did those work out for the USA?

[@mohammedaleissa8666]

Petyr Kowalski you’re right i agree with you!

[@1FreeSelfGoverningAmericanMan]

C'mon Petyr, when has the US military ever been used for "defense"? You can say the vulture is a dove, but it is still a vulture.

[@krissmiley7519]

Thats a reckless way to look as spending , what the U.S needs to do is balance its budget and pay down its deficit, not waste half a trillion dollars going to mars . Let the chinese, or the E.U, go there the effect will still be the same

[@jimsmith3971]

Curious Droid is such a good channel. Nice guy. Crazy shirts. Tea and biscuits.

[@lozhell]

Absolutely best channel on KZbin!

[@yves3560]

You convinced me Curious Droid, I'm NOT going..

[@paulg8394]

One thing that bugs me. Thay already new this among other things. Like traveling fast in space is fine. Until you come across a peace off dust the same size off your finger witch will go through the ship. Long term..build a ship in space. Cost billions or even trillions who cares. All nations come together. Ship with Some sort off gravity Electrical shielding with water or plasma Big enough to carry hundreds with massive amount off spare parts for spare parts. Engine designs 2 or 3. Build in space

[@ismaelcordero128]

The music of your videos its greatt,it make your videos more interestings.

[@elvindelacrur2160]

Your very INFORMATIVE

[@HtPt]

i rather stay home in plante earth and watch KZbin ...

[@rogerrondina7610]

😁

[@christoffernilsson854]

True Dat Mon Ya

[@DestroyerWill]

Maybe you could watch some KZbin videos on spelling and grammar for English

[@FlexBeanbag]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJ7GaoF8m82rbZY

[@Solocat1]

Check out the spelling channels.

[@PcGameGold]

They should send older people to Mars, people who have had a life and don't mind a one way ticket.

[@edoedo8686]

Excellent. Many science fiction shows/movies, documentary rarely discuss the necessity of gravity, radiation/particle protection, long term confinement.

[@hexacarbide268]

great video

[@DanBullard]

I prefer that we colonize Venus with aerostats in the atmosphere of Venus. The journey is shorter, solar power is more abundant and Venus has a thicker atmosphere that would at least protect the astronauts once they arrive. Gravity is higher than Mars, but less than the Earth, so that would help some with the bone loss problem.

[@thundercactus]

Venus is about 0.9G, nice thick atmosphere, about 96% CO2 by volume. Only major obstacle is the balmy 462C surface temperature

[@stinkystinkpot]

thundercactus Gotta bring beach umbrellas to stay out of the sun.

[@krissmiley7519]

What would the point of such a endeavour be ?

[@giovannimorrisone483]

What are you smoking?? ..and can I have some?

[@DanBullard]

@@giovannimorrisone483 Really good sh-t, and in Oregon it's legal!

[@rvrpropertiesllc]

The first people to land on Mars probably won't come back home.

[@Music1222]

I agree with Andreas. We need centrifugal force artificial gravity to go more than anything - big rings around the spaceship. We could try solar sails as well as the propulsion engines to compensate for the heavier weight from the rings and the shielding.

[@johnmiriti9768]

The depth of knowledge on your presentation makes me want to listen and listen..very exciting..I equate you to David Attenborough,the great British presenter and researcher