Skip to main content
19 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Nov 4, 2021 at 11:40 comment added Ng Ph @Slarty, it's not a question of preference but of clariry. The OP eventually has explained the motivation in comments below the answer by Woody. To me this clarification is essential to understanding the question (and avoiding unecessary comments as well as off-topic answers). You may have a different opinion, and that's fine (let's see whether the OP will accept your answer).
Nov 4, 2021 at 11:21 comment added Slarty @NgPh it seems to me you would prefer a different question. Why not ask it separately? This particular question makes some assumptions, which is fine. The question of do we need humans on Mars is not part of this question, but would make an interesting question in its own right.
Nov 3, 2021 at 9:31 comment added Ng Ph In my opinion, your question is not straightforwardly put. Edit2 even confuses me more (currently, the robots on Mars are doing destructive chemical analysis of Martian soil). You seem to insist on the line of the "by the way": BTW, we have a base, what experiences...? As we all know, any activity in-situ on Mars is extremely costly (as any activity in deep space in fact). So people would rather ask: which activities should have priority, then how can you plan, design and build for it? The planners will always ask: can't you do it down here? can't you do it remotely with robots?
Nov 3, 2021 at 0:40 comment added WasatchWind @NgPh .... no. I don't get why explaining this is so hard. We have a mars base two decades in the future, what experiments are they conducting on site?
Nov 2, 2021 at 22:31 comment added Ng Ph Are you alluding to experimenting with something in such a large scale that it could destroy Mars topography, it could alter Mars atmosphere, in short with something that we would not allow them (the "scientists") to do on Earth?
Nov 2, 2021 at 22:02 comment added WasatchWind @NgPh - what I mean is, it is not precious to the point that, while still experimenting on Mars, they are treating it like it's solid gold. This means that destructive methods of analysis are on the table.
Nov 2, 2021 at 21:58 comment added Ng Ph You added "this soil is no longer very precious. They have been on Mars for 10 years". What do you mean by "precious"? Do you mean that they have brought back to Earth enough samples that studying Mars geology in-situ is no longer of interest? IMO, you could have formulated your question as follows: assuming that travelling to, staying an extended time there, and go home from, Mars are no longer challenging, which scientific activities in-situ justify the presence of a scientist on Mars?
Nov 2, 2021 at 18:06 comment added WasatchWind If people want to discuss this elsewhere, fine by me, but most people here don't seem interested in answering my question - that is, what human scientists, not robots, would be doing on the red planet a decade after a mars colony is founded.
Nov 2, 2021 at 18:00 comment added Ng Ph @BrendanLuke15, good point, but why that experiment should be done with a scientist? Why not a monk, or a poet?
Nov 2, 2021 at 16:48 history edited WasatchWind CC BY-SA 4.0
added 387 characters in body
Nov 2, 2021 at 7:54 history edited WasatchWind CC BY-SA 4.0
edited body
Nov 2, 2021 at 2:14 answer added Woody timeline score: 2
Nov 1, 2021 at 23:41 answer added Slarty timeline score: 3
Nov 1, 2021 at 23:13 answer added uhoh timeline score: -1
Nov 1, 2021 at 18:17 history edited WasatchWind CC BY-SA 4.0
added 250 characters in body
Nov 1, 2021 at 15:06 comment added BrendanLuke15 Arguably, a scientist on Mars is the experiment
Nov 1, 2021 at 15:00 history tweeted twitter.com/StackSpaceExp/status/1455187885762748419
S Nov 1, 2021 at 6:52 review First questions
Nov 1, 2021 at 8:45
S Nov 1, 2021 at 6:52 history asked WasatchWind CC BY-SA 4.0