h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Xanatic, mind you, there was the one (two?0 that went missing on touch down. Good circumstantial evidence of intelligent life I reckon!

Okay Ictoan, good call... It was a hurried post... what I meant by that is that as far as knowledge of our planet is concerned... There is still a great deal we don't know(probably) as we are constantly discovering bits and pieces- there is a great deal of the earth left yet to unveil...

And as far as finding life on mars is concerned, it's like finding a microscopic needle in a colossal haystack, if you will...

er... I was just wondering 'life on mars' it appears to me that man is looking for carbon based life, why should life on another planet be carbon based? .. is man that vain??

Toodle Pip!

Bertie

Non carbon based life could be extreemly difficult to recognise. A silica formation could be alive but how would you tell?

Scientist recently found out that there is a LOT of radiation on Mars...more than a radiation suit could take...so unless the Russians build new equipment this plant will be built by robots in a canyon. That in itself doesn't seem like a good idea...and then maintained by people from Earth watching machines.

What about the atmosphere of Mars...do different things happen to nuclear materials there...we have no way of knowing...and I don't think experimenting is a great idea...but I am not as worried about this as the robot thing.

If we were to have such a plant...assuming it is run by robots...then we would have to have CONSTANT flights to Mars with multiple backup parts for if something went wrong.

Nuclear material exploding in space right next to Earth is not a great idea either...so I hope they make the nuclear power there...never making any of it here and taking it there.

But I suppose they would have to make things such as plutonium here...sounds dangerous...I would not want to be the astronaut involved with that.

Also that means that people would start claiming parts of space as there property...doesn't sound like it would be a very peaceful process as it never has been here on Earth.
And if we have a war...someday it will extend to space.

Wat u mean no ecosystems on Mars? Thats my home plannet your talking about

Any organism that isn't carbon-based would be extreemly basic, silicon is the only feasible alternative and because of the relative size of individual Si atoms a Silicon chain couldn't be much longer than about 10-20 molecules. Carbon chains can include thousands of molecules, giving the neccesary complexity for advanced life-forms. Also, given the distance between Mars and ourselves, wouldn't a Martian colony end up being a separate entity, filled with true Martians, after a few decades?

"Silicon is the only feasible alternative..." - that we know of.

Sheesh, scientists. Always assuming they know it all.....

No, seriously, this area is one thing we're certain of. There are no gaps in the Periodic table below no. 112 and if we do discover super-heavy stable elements with atomic numbers of 120 or higher these will be too big. My GCSE Chemistry teacher was one of the leading researchers in this area before he started teaching so he'd be the guy to know. Also, as my name suggests, I'm a literary soul, not a scientist

As I remember they were pretty certain that the atom was the smallest thing there was once, and the guy who first suggested the world was round wasn't exactly hailed as a genius either

*seethes in disgust at having to defend science* Nobody after the 1900's said the atom was the smallest thing in existence, they said it is the smallest *stable* thing in existence. I'd be quite happy to stake my life on the fact we won't find any complex organism based on anything other than Carbon. It's just not possible

It's not worth it Honestlago. I'm TPC's other/better half and a scientist...he still don't believe in science. It is apparently somewhat of an amusement to his older freinds!

Have some and .


Zantic , in hopes of avoiding someone elses coronry...

So, anyone hav ean idea of why they won't to build this thing up there? : As a first step in establishing a perminant colany out there? As a first step in establishing mining out there? For the hell of it <?>

Do you want it in your back garden?

""Silicon is the only feasible alternative..." - that we know of.

Sheesh, scientists. Always assuming they know it all..... "

Assuming? Assuming?!?!?!?

It was on Star Trek, what more proof do you need?

(Do computer AI count as silicon based life form? )

I thgink the only reason to build a Martian colony would be to prove we can. It could have some scientific advantages such as testing the law of mediocrity but I think the distances involved would negate this. It'd be interesting to see whether Martian colonies would just be an extension of terrestrial territories or something else completely. As for science questions, Xantac (sp? sorry I can't remember) I'm taking your advice and leaving the hot potato well alone

I wonder what other countries think of this.

I just remembered we have a terrestrial precedent for establishing scientific bases without claiming political territory, Antarctica. I think any colony would be like that, it'd be impractical to try and say 'this is my piece of Mars' because you can't make anyone listen. In any case colonies would be de facto property of either the US, EU or Russian Federation as they are the only ones with the capabilities of getting anything to Mars