25

Also, what are the possible obstacles of doing that? At a bare minimum, there are at least four obstacles: We can't do it. It would cost too much even if we could do it technically. It would be too risky even if we could do it technically and financially. We just don't want to do it. We can't do it. The nuclear industry generates 2000 to 2300 metric tons ...


24

It crashed and the aftermath was photographed. https://www.space.com/mars-perseverance-rover-photo-sky-crane-crash A moment of respect for the descent stage. Within two minutes of safely delivering me to the surface of Mars, I caught the smoke plume on one of my Hazcams from its intentional surface impact — an act that protected me and the scientific ...


20

Quarantine was always a standard procedure for the astronauts which landed on the Moon. The Apollo astronauts were kept in quarantine just in case they contracted something on the Moon's surface. This turned out to be unnecessary, but better safe than sorry. But how likely is it that there are deadly pathogens on another planet? I would say it is pretty ...


11

It's one of several factors to prevent Earth microorganisms from contaminating the moon. The Apollo Program Summary Report states 8.5.2.1 Lunar-surface contamination.- Nations involved in the exploration of extraterrestrial bodies have agreed to take all steps that are technically feasible to prevent the contam- ination of these bodies during ...


10

One more reason on top of David Hammen's excellent answer: Today's trash may well be tomorrow's raw materials. 100 years from now, today's nuclear waste might be useful for something. We just don't know what, and removing it from the planet could turn out to be a very bad idea. Another point: Most of the mass of a launched rocket never leaves the ...


10

One tool in the astrobiology toolbox is chirality, the property that many chemical compounds exist as "left-handed" and "right-handed" mirror images. These have the exact same properties of course, as they are the exact same compounds. But biochemical processes will typically only be able to produce one of them. Which means that if a ...


7

We believe so, but a lot of work remains to test and qualify a design to assure containment. These papers outline the approach, which is a simple, extremely robust parachuteless entry vehicle design.


6

There's no need to worry about any viruses from Mars. If there are any, there would also have to be host organisms through which these viruses would multiply and survive (it's still debatable whether viruses even count as life). And host organisms are easier to detect through e.g. their metabolic process byproducts, and also more difficult to contaminate ...


5

The risk of back contamination is quite small, and in fact, most likely happens on a regular basis, via Martian meteorites (At least, according to Robert Zubrin). And in fact, Martian bacteria would be very unlikely to be able to thrive on Earth, making their possibility of disease spread even less likely. Wikipedia actually has several plausible scenarios ...


4

Biomedical Results of Apollo has an entire chapter devoted to that topic: section IV chapter 2, pp 425-434. There is much detail, but in summary: Fifteen species of animals, in five phyla, were exposed to lunar soil. After allowing time for something to grow, light and electron microscopy of tissues from the subjects revealed no evidence of replicating ...


4

I searched for "specifications for space station connectors" and found this document "Space Station Approved Electrical,Electronic, and Electromechanical Parts List." It lists a bunch of connector specifications whose name includes "environment resisting" or "environment resistant". Here is a sample. Looking up the listed specification was not too ...


4

No, sterile conditions aren't necessary for most spacecraft. Satellites are usually built in a cleanroom to prevent dust and dirt getting in and causing problems like electrical shorts, dirt in moving parts causing extra wear, and contamination of optical systems.


4

Short answer: The aerogel itself is sufficient to restrain the samples. The captured particles are tiny and therefore have a very high surface area to volume ratio. This means that much like dust or cloud droplets in an atmosphere, they have a very low "terminal velocity" in the aerogel under the relatively modest accelerations of reentry (modest compared ...


3

First, no that's not the reason it is one way, though it is something that is a matter of concern that has to be thought about. It's for reasons of cost and technology. Mars is a much harder place to land on and take off from than the Moon. That's because of the rocket equation The delta v to escape from Mars to orbit is 4.1 km / sec. To escape from the ...


3

First of all, it's doubtful that decontamination procedures on US rovers landed thus far were even completely effective, and let's not talk about the Russians. That aside, I think the answer to your question is most definitely: No. The human presence is in constant contact with its germ-spewing inhabitants and will most certainly contaminate the landing ...


2

Principle 9 of the UN's Principles Relevant to the Use of Nuclear Power Sources In Outer Space says that whoever caused the debris field to happen must pay to clean up the mess.


2

One key aspect not mentioned so far is the possibility of contamination of Mars with Earth life that is not due to a failure of planetary protection. Carl Sagan was one of the first to suggest the possibility of cross contamination of life between Mars and Earth due to asteroid impacts as mentioned in his Cosmos series and as chronicled in "Carl Sagan'...


2

First of all, some effort is made to prevent contamination by earth organisms for precisely this reason, but it is not perfect. But, if scientists do detect life it will probably be possible to tell that it is not of earthly origin. Here are some possible lines of evidence: Biochemistry is complicated. We don't know that DNA is the only way genetic ...


2

Vacuum is a harsh environment, so having the suit exposed to it should get rid of most bacteria. It is not a bulletproof method though, as confirmed by a famous case. Another good opportunity is to use UV sterilization, which offers to kill at least a good chunk of the bacteria. This can not possibly harm the suit, as they are designed to withstand sunlight,...


1

What would be the positive and negative affects of using other planets and/or space itself for storing trash - instead of wasting place for that on Earth? I'll focus on the positive since others have covered the negative already and quite well. First, as you stated, it would remove nuclear material from Earth where human and other life exists. Second you ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible