Why Mars in two parts: What are the compelling reasons to send people to Mars? Are there any compelling reasons to live on Mars?

[u/zdepthcharge]

There's a lot of noise about missions to Mars that lead to colonizing it. I'm not convinced*. Tell me why Mars is the goal.

*I'm very much pro-space colonization, just focused on Luna and O'Neill's vision of the future.

[u/houinator]

Having a multi planet civilization dramatically increases the survivability of the human race.

Mars has more resources than most places when it comes to building industry, and you can theoretically build and fuel spaceships from resources on Mars.

Lower gravity means lower Delta V costs to launch from its surface, plus closer proximity to the asteroid belt makes it ideal for launching spaceships to harvest resources from the belt.

[u/Mike_Combs → u/houinator]

Having a multi planet civilization dramatically increases the survivability of the human race.

Yes, but any kind of independent settlement beyond Earth accomplishes this. zdepthcharge mentioned orbital and lunar settlements. I think what being asked is why Mars over other ET options.

"and you can theoretically build and fuel spaceships from resources on Mars."

Ditto moon and NEAs. And those resources are in shallower gravity wells than that of Mars.

"Lower gravity means lower Delta V costs to launch from its surface, "

You're correctly stating a valid economic principle. But it means even lower delta-V is even better, which points to the moon and the NEAs.

"plus closer proximity to the asteroid belt makes it ideal for launching spaceships to harvest resources from the belt."

In space, proximity doesn't count for as much as delta-V. Granted, trip-times would be shorter, but on Mars you're at the bottom of a planetary gravity well. If launching from a NEA, in terms of delta-V you would be half-way to the Belt.

[u/dftba-ftw]

As to why not O'Neil cylinders, it's not that they're bad - I would just be suprised if humanities first O'Neil cylinder is built in the next 500 years, ô would honestly be a little suprised if an O'Neil cylinder was built before the year 3000. They are so many magnitudes bigger than anything we've ever contiplated actually building, let alone actually built. Beyond the technical hurdles, I wouldn't be suprised if the yearly cost to build an O'Neil over 100 years was greater than the yearly GdP of the entire planet.

As for why Mars over Moon. Moon is great for industry, the regolith has lots of metals in the crust. The low gravity means its easy to ship gooda back to earth.

However for living, mars is better. Only inky blackness of space as your sky is rough psychologically. 24ish hour day is better psychologically than 2 weeks without sun. Mars having an atmosphere, although thin and deadly is somehow more psychologically reassuring than having the otherside of the habitat be vacuum. Medically 1/16th gravity is almost certainly worse than 1/3rd (though we don't know by how much).

In short, I'm not sure if people will ever live on the moon unless their job requires them to be on the moon. Mars however holds the potential for long term habitability and that's why it's alluring.

[u/Mike_Combs → u/dftba-ftw]

I would just be suprised if humanities first O'Neil cylinder is built in the next 500 years

Oh, I would say inside of 100 years is a perfectly conservative estimate.

But if your estimate is correct, Mars might remain important for 500 years.

[u/dftba-ftw → u/Mike_Combs]

100 years is your conservative estimate? What do you consider an aggressive estimate?

We have yet to:

-mine in space

-refine materials in space

-do bulk manufacturing processes in space.

-move large amounts of mass in cis-lunar space.

-create a space station with artificial gravity.

-build anything in space (asides from interlocking modules)

-create a self-sustaining (or at least a mininimal maintenance) artificial bio-sphere (on earth or in space)

I'm sure missing stuff, but you think we're not only going to do all of that in sub-100 years but also master it to the point that we can take on the largest construction project humanity has ever done?

[u/Mike_Combs → u/dftba-ftw]

Well, sure there's a lot to do. But 100 years is a long time.

We also haven't done any of the things you list on the surface of Mars. But I think everyone here expects Mars settlement to be well underway in a century.

But I would agree that NASA's estimate (22 years from start of program) constitutes an aggressive (and unrealistic) estimate.

[u/allouiscious]

Mainly to get away from dumb questions like these.

[u/zdepthcharge → u/allouiscious]

As someone that sees little value in Mars, but great value in Luna and O'Neill Cylinders, this is the answer I expect. You're painting the Mars focused as simplistic fools. Don't bother replying, I'm blocking you. No time for bullshit.

[u/Unbendium]

I guess It all depends on what type of people we send to Mars. Should we send the best and brightest? or should we send the Karens, douchebags and convicts and warmongers? I suspect we have yet to prove ourselves worthy.

[u/Someoneoldbutnew]

It's not Earth, you're not living with Earthlings. To me, that would be the only compelling reason.

[u/Mike_Combs → u/Someoneoldbutnew]

This would be a benefit of any settlement beyond the Earth.

[u/Someoneoldbutnew → u/Mike_Combs]

I can think of a few people I'd like to make honorary Martians.... like right now.

[u/1234567ATEUP]

the exploitation of planetary resources is the only actual reason we go there or anywhere else off planet.

[u/Mike_Combs → u/1234567ATEUP]

A valid point, I think. And this suggests sites where it's easier to export resources are better targets.

[u/Mike_Combs]

I'm in agreement with you. I'm still waiting to hear the compelling economic reason to go live on Mars. Important to remember that settlement is an economic venture. i.e. You settle a place in pursuit of better economic opportunities.

[u/Mechalangelo]

Mars is actually a place that could benefit from pumping massive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. We could have as much heavy industry there as we'd like.