 |
| |
|
|
kittenOFchaos
|
 |
Halifax, Calderdale, England
May 2001
time: 05:27
|
|
For my own part I enjoyed Red Mars, Blue Mars and Green Mars, but can't put a finger on why exactly!
I think it was the scale, the vision, drama and that things happened, the big story does move along pretty quickly. I love grandiose civil engineering projects that can have a real impact (hopefully positive) on our world, I love the thought of having the technologies to prolong life forever whilst retaining health. I love the idea that "we" could change Mars into a self-sufficient world and in such as short time.
I feel that is why I enjoyed the books despite some quite frankly atrocious content.
Frank, Boon, Arkady and Nadia were certainly the best characters in the book and I did enjoy those parts of the book that focussed upon them rather than characters such as Michael, Hiroko, Ann etc.
Indeed Hiroko and ALL that came of that side of the first 100 and the bloody children like Nirgail I would have loved to see brutally murdered. The politics on Mars was a coalition of the stupid with the Reds and Ann being down right crazy.
The colonization of Mars won't happen as in the book, not even close. It won't be as fast, well supported and the Earth won't be in such a mess, nor will the UN/whatever be so tyrannical in its control of the groups that go. It won't need to, the countries whose money put the people there will look to get a return in their investment and won't be putting people there so they do whatever they want to.
But as long as it can give me visions of vast civil engineering projects and fantastic technological developments, I'm happy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Static Universe
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Static Universe, tell us what you really think. Don't hold back. 
|
I'm a decent fellow, really I am. 
To be fair, the second half wasn't all that bad of a read. Robinson should stick to this type of political potboiler style as it suits him better. Or perhaps he should read more Asimov to learn how exposition should be done.
quote:
Science fiction, even hard science fiction, is about the human condition. It sounds like what you wanted was a technical manual with a story woven through it. |
What I wanted, and still want, is a realistic depiction of the settling of another world. Some dramatic life and death struggle to showcase the talents of humanity, working together in at least some harmony. Not all this business about how scientists, unhindered by the bureaucratic apparatus and operating almost completely free of central leadership, will work miracles and everything will work out almost perfectly. (Until the people from earth show up wanting a return on their sizeable investment, that is.)
It's elitism in the worst possible way, and it's not surprising that Arthur C. Clarke extols the books virtues so highly, as this is right up his alley. It's the sci-fi old idea that once humanity frees itself from the pencil pushers and those tedious, irrational people who are more interested in feeding themselves than political theory, everything will be fine. We'll get a new "American Revolution", this time on Mars, although the same story could just as easily be told on the Moon I suppose. ( Something tells me it has.  ) Asimov makes basically the same arguments in Foundation.
Perhaps it's just that I prefer the Star Trek style of science fiction more. I still have some hope for humanity left, and am not prepared to throw the earth to the wolves to get a better thing going on Mars.
quote:
Red Mars is a story about what happens to people. None of the situations people come up against in the book are situations we aren't going to have to deal with, one way or another, in the colonization of Mars. |
So when we finally get that expedition going to Mars, the crew will be composed on fifty year olds, leadership will be fragmented by philosophical visionaries immediately up lift-off, and there will be a mystical "coyote" running around? Yeah, sure.
quote:
The exposure to high levels of radiation for example. I, for one, didn't know that CO2 was poisonous. I just thought it was a lack of oxygen that made the Martian atmosphere deadly.
|
No argument here, I guess. 
quote:
Why won't Martian terraforming options work on Earth? Life! The Sahara is a living ecosystem. We place a lot of value on our wild places in this world. People also live in many of these places, so you have to account for them as well, especially in democracies. India may want to displace three million people to create a reservior, but if they refuse to move, they have a problem on their hands. If they're China, they can forcably relocate people.
|
What I don't understand is how they can build a magic gadget on Mars to do whatever the story purposes require, but can't seem to figure out anything back on earth.
quote:
The problems the Martians are dealing with have little pratical application on Earth. Our problem is global warming. On Mars they want global warming. On Mars, they need to put stuff into the atmosphere. On Earth, we want to take stuff out of the atmosphere.
|
The problems have no applications, but the solutions do. Why is it that knowledge doesn't seem to make it's way back to earth? The implication is that people left behind on earth are for the most part not the forward thinkers that the First 100 are. Elitism.
The book makes it seem like once we get off earth, scientists are suddenly much more intelligent. Perhaps because they have no oversight from lesser thinkers, they can finally push the envelope to the max and all their theories conveniently seem to work out.
quote:
Mars may be a desert, but it's one like the Antarctic, one full of water (at least the story assumes it). Earth is covered in water, but we don't have enough of the right kind of water.
|
Then why can they easily desalinate Mars and not desalinate oceans? It doesn't make sense, given the type of cheap processes they develop on Mars. Must be those darn bureaucrat holding things back again.
quote:
Frank's problem with John is all about jealousy. Things come easy to John, Frank has to work for them. Frank was supposed to be the leader of the expedition, John becomes the person everyone looks to, John gets Maya, John becomes unofficial leader of Mars, etc. John is Frank's obstacle in all things, so he must be done away with.
|
Frank's problem is more Frank I would think. I don't see things coming any less easily to him, although he thinks they don't. Perhaps he would benefit from a good therapist, althought not that Michel chap. And how cliche is it for the psychologist character be the one who goes crazy, anyway? Don't even get me started. 
quote:
So, what happens when new ground is opened up for people to begin livin their lives. At what point do you stop being colonists and become citizens of a new society. What rights do you have, what responsibilities do you owe?
|
I'm a firm believer in the idea that those who contend for their liberty seldom get anything but new masters (Emerson?). All a revolution really accomplishes it to begin the process all over again, with a smaller, more efficient political unit. Nothing really changes in how things are run. Distribution systems may differ, but there is still distribution. Someone's in charge, and usually the worst eventually rise to the top of the political food chain and the revolutionary process starts over again.
I want something new from sci-fi, something fresh! Something that shows the way, not sees the future through the eyes of the present.
quote:
Everything outside Earth is assumed, by existing treaty, to be the common property of humanity. So what happens when people start living there. At what point do they have a more important say in what happens. It's kind of like Alaska or the American West, in this way. Most of those areas are Federal property, the common property of the whole of the American people. People live there, however. Who has the greater right? Proximaty changes the equation, since they are too close to the US to assert any effective independence. Mars, however, is far away. How does that change things? |
Distance doesn't absolve them from responsibilities to their human brothers back on earth. The earth needs the resources Mars can proide, and has made a sizeable investment in getting them. Is it appropriate for the Martian colonists to begin fomenting revolution within a generation? On the colony ship out, in fact?
Sure, the transnationals are wrong in how they wish to administrate the planet. But no capitalist system can adequately distribute social resources, nor has anyone ever shown that they can (Are you reading this George Bush?) And the civil bureaucracy of the UN is complicit in letting them handle things as they wish. No argument there, either in the book or in reality. But have the colonists no responsibility to the common herd?
Maybe I just expect better of humanity, and wish we solve some of these problems before we move to new worlds, rather than exporting them as we move into the universe.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Static Universe
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kittenOFchaos
I think it was the scale, the vision, drama and that things happened, the big story does move along pretty quickly. I love grandiose civil engineering projects that can have a real impact (hopefully positive) on our world, I love the thought of having the technologies to prolong life forever whilst retaining health.
|
I love big projects as well, but felt the "longevity vaccine" was more of a literary gimmick to keep the central characters young and fresh for the years the terraforming and settlement took to accomplish. They were too old to begin with though, IMO. For example, why would Nadia, an overweight woman in her 50s be chosen for the expedition?
quote:
I feel that is why I enjoyed the books despite some quite frankly atrocious content.
|
I'm glad I'm not the only one who felt that way.
quote:
Indeed Hiroko and ALL that came of that side of the first 100 and the bloody children like Nirgail I would have loved to see brutally murdered. The politics on Mars was a coalition of the stupid with the Reds and Ann being down right crazy.
|
I hate when writers drop in these mysterious, inscrutable Asian characters. And the whole ecological subplot was just plain stupid, IMO. Dead world here, folks!
quote:
The colonization of Mars won't happen as in the book, not even close. It won't be as fast, well supported and the Earth won't be in such a mess, nor will the UN/whatever be so tyrannical in its control of the groups that go. It won't need to, the countries whose money put the people there will look to get a return in their investment and won't be putting people there so they do whatever they want to.
|
Completely agree.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Static Universe
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JohnT
I have a feeling a lot of people are not going to like how Robinson claims that a stronger UN, by weakening the authority of the nation-states, will allow for stronger multi-national corporations. Robinson does give corporations too much credit for strategic, long-term thinking though. |
It's a matter of scale really. Given the fact that national govenments are easily under the sway of corporations, it's reasonable to assume the UN would not be any less corruptible, even more so, since it would mean bigger bribes in fewers pockets.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
 |
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:27
|
|
quote:
I've read many sci-fi novels with technical details and good drama. |
You are missing the point. I'm not saying that it can't be done, I'm saying that I just wouldn't read it  .
quote:
What I don't understand is how they can build a magic gadget on Mars to do whatever the story purposes require, but can't seem to figure out anything back on earth. |
Who says they can't? We don't get the story from Earth, just what people are seeing from Mars. The problems on Earth are much worse than those on Mars. Overcrowding cannot simply be solved by terraforming. The problems are just more difficult.
Personally, I thought it was a good yarn. Nice characters, and an engrossing stroy. Robinson may wish to guide you towards a certain point of view (ie, capitalism bad, socialism good), but he tells a good story of how all the people relate to each other in the world.
quote:
Everything outside Earth is assumed, by existing treaty, to be the common property of humanity. So what happens when people start living there. At what point do they have a more important say in what happens. It's kind of like Alaska or the American West, in this way. Most of those areas are Federal property, the common property of the whole of the American people. People live there, however. Who has the greater right? Proximaty changes the equation, since they are too close to the US to assert any effective independence. Mars, however, is far away. How does that change things? |
This is the main question, and it's a good one. Who controls what happens on Mars? The people living there, or the people that made colonization happen in the first place. After all, like Frank says, the reason they went was for selfish reasons on the part of the governments and corporations that sent them there, not for 'science'.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Static Universe
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
quote:
I've read many sci-fi novels with technical details and good drama. |
You are missing the point. I'm not saying that it can't be done, I'm saying that I just wouldn't read it .
|
Oh, I saw your point. I probably wouldn't want to read it either. I think many others, however, would.
quote:
quote:
What I don't understand is how they can build a magic gadget on Mars to do whatever the story purposes require, but can't seem to figure out anything back on earth. |
Who says they can't? We don't get the story from Earth, just what people are seeing from Mars. The problems on Earth are much worse than those on Mars. Overcrowding cannot simply be solved by terraforming. The problems are just more difficult.
|
The problem of terraforming Mars is directly applicable to the earth. Most of the problem on earth come from people being crowded into habitable areas. Robinson himself makes this point about how in Egypt they crowded into the non-desert areas.
If they can bioengineer plants to grow in Martian desert, why can't they do it for an Earth desert? If they can desalinate an entire planet, why not a few million gallons of sea water for irrigation purposes? Why must they exploit Mars? Are there no resources on the moon? What about undersea mining? Undersea cities? Given the advances on Mars, all these things are possible.
quote:
Personally, I thought it was a good yarn. Nice characters, and an engrossing stroy. Robinson may wish to guide you towards a certain point of view (ie, capitalism bad, socialism good), but he tells a good story of how all the people relate to each other in the world.
|
I'll admit it got fairly entertaining in the second half, after it stopped being about terraforming. It has a few clever bits, like all the Americans thinking Frank is excellent with languages and all the non-Americans thinking he's terrible with their language. But nothing really too original here.
quote:
This is the main question, and it's a good one. Who controls what happens on Mars? The people living there, or the people that made colonization happen in the first place. After all, like Frank says, the reason they went was for selfish reasons on the part of the governments and corporations that sent them there, not for 'science'. |
It's a difficult question to answer, because I didn't find the corporate greed in the novel to be that plausible. I also didn't buy the fact there would be zero civilian social infrastructure built whatsoever. I just don't think the UN or individual nations would have relinquished so much control to the multinationals, corrupt as the UN seemed to be.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Static Universe
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Because as che states Mars is dead! I could imagine that there is a big enviro movement if everything is so crowded. Destroying the Sahara and all the 'life' in it would be unthinkable, I think.
|
The so-called environmental movement is largely centered in the West. Given the pressure to send people Mars for a better life mainly seem to come from uninhabitable lands (for example the Arabs), or nations that cannot produce enough food relative to their population , I can't see that their preference wouldn't have been to turn their deserts into gardens in the first place. They don't seem such environmentalists to me anyway.
Yes, yes, I know we have no idea what's going on back on earth, but again, the level of technology shown could easily relieve these problems. Is it that there's no money in it? I find that hard to believe. Is it that the poor countries cannot afford it? Easier to believe. Which is all the more reason that the UN would not give up so easily to the multinationals.
Especially since the sudden glut of previously scarce commodities would probably wreck the earth's global economy in days. The multinationals simply would simply not be allowed to rape Mars like they do in the book. I don't believe there would be a complete absence of import quotas laid down by the UN and regulatory control over Mars.
quote:
And remember, the original send up was simply to benefit Russia and the USA. They wouldn't care too much about irrigation (and undersea mining might already been happening) and simply want minerals. Of course transnationals have most of the power and would be the ones directly benefiting.
|
One of the things that confused me in the book is that the Russians and USA pay for it all, then in the second expedition there is no one from any of the countries represented in the original expedition. And the second expedition is like hundreds of people. WTF? Why would they logically do this?
quote:
quote:
I'll admit it got fairly entertaining in the second half, after it stopped being about terraforming. |
You have to set that part of up for the second part.
|
I should have jumped in around page 250, I wouldn't have missed much. And there'd still be a little suspense in the John-Maya-Frank triangle as well.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Static Universe
The so-called environmental movement is largely centered in the West. Given the pressure to send people Mars for a better life mainly seem to come from uninhabitable lands (for example the Arabs), or nations that cannot produce enough food relative to their population , I can't see that their preference wouldn't have been to turn their deserts into gardens in the first place. They don't seem such environmentalists to me anyway. |
Part of the problem is cost. On Earth, there is a money economy, and that has to be taken into account. It's very expensive to desalinate water. On Mars, where it's always below zero, they can simply set up a transport system to bring it back from the poles. They have an excess of rovers, so it's more cost effective to set up a system to drag ice down from the poles than other solutions.
On Earth, it's easier to steal someone else's water rather than desalinate, and so you have wars over the Golan Heights, and Turkey daming the Tigris and Euphrates rivers or the US taking all of the water from the Colorado and leaving Mexico with a pittance. Poor countries get screwed, because they have neither the money to make potable water nor the power to steal it.
Remember, Martian solutions are not necessarily applicable to Earth. Earth is much warmer, so making the Sahara bloom is a much more difficult problem. Even if you could get the water, what do you do about the heat? How will it affect the global climate, since it would change African weather patterns, which would presumably change weather elsewhere. Efforts to make Africa a foodbasket have falied because the high tech solutions given them in the past required a high energy input which couldn't be maintained when the price of oil exploded.
Remember, Mars is a command economy, so they don't have to worry about what is economically inefficient. They don't send the minerals they mine home (before the space elevator) not because they can't, but because those on Earth wouldn't make any money doing it. But they have the capacity to do it.
quote:
Especially since the sudden glut of previously scarce commodities would probably wreck the earth's global economy in days. The multinationals simply would simply not be allowed to rape Mars like they do in the book. I don't believe there would be a complete absence of import quotas laid down by the UN and regulatory control over Mars.
|
The UN has no military other than what is granted it by the countries of the world, which can be yanked at any time. The UN has no police force. It has to hire private companies to police Mars. Once the transnationals get involved (or should we call the transplanetaries now?), the UN is simply a fig leaf for the corporations.
As for what the glut of previously scare commodities would do to the economy, capitalism is anarchic. If it can be done profitably, it will be done, come hell or high water. Nor do companies stop to think about the consequnces of what everyone jumping in the market would do. That's why we have a boom-bust cycle. The Martian colonization and exploitation effort would be no different than any other newly profitable endever.
Everyone would be trying to get in on the act and make as much money as possible without considering the consequences of everyone trying to do so at the same time. We have seen it over and over again with producer countries through the history of capitalism. The tobacco market, the cotton market, the sugar market, the banana market, the coffee market, etc. It will be the same in space.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
|
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:27
|
|
quote:
Yes, yes, I know we have no idea what's going on back on earth, but again, the level of technology shown could easily relieve these problems. |
How do you relieve the problems of overcrowding and not really touch those areas that people are living in already? That is the main problem, if you change the Sahara, what happens to the people that live on the edge of that desert, does their climate change?
It doesn't matter what level of tech there is, there are always unintended consequences that perhaps the people on Earth don't want to deal with. There was some allusion that the Great Dust Storm may have been caused by some of Sax's terraforming. That just wouldn't fly on Earth. It could on Mars, because hardly anyone lives there.
quote:
One of the things that confused me in the book is that the Russians and USA pay for it all, then in the second expedition there is no one from any of the countries represented in the original expedition. And the second expedition is like hundreds of people. WTF? Why would they logically do this? |
Squatter's rights. Or, better put, people who are there first have more power. The Americans and Russians obviously thought that those that were there first would give those countries more of a toehold than anyone else that came later. Remember, Frank was the US Secretary to Mars, and because he was on of the first, you can bet he had more of voice than, say, the Japanese Secretary, etc.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Static Universe
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
quote:
Yes, yes, I know we have no idea what's going on back on earth, but again, the level of technology shown could easily relieve these problems. |
How do you relieve the problems of overcrowding and not really touch those areas that people are living in already? That is the main problem, if you change the Sahara, what happens to the people that live on the edge of that desert, does their climate change?
It doesn't matter what level of tech there is, there are always unintended consequences that perhaps the people on Earth don't want to deal with. There was some allusion that the Great Dust Storm may have been caused by some of Sax's terraforming. That just wouldn't fly on Earth. It could on Mars, because hardly anyone lives there.
|
You make a good point here, but it really boils down to an interpretation we have of the level of technology as presented in the novel. In my view, certainly the advances pioneered on Mars have direct application back on earth, in terms of chemistry, biophysics, whatever. Desalination is expensive and energy-consuming now, given the advanced chemical engineering they do on Mars, it's simply not believable to me that some of those processes wouldn't make it back to earth and be used for these purposes.
Granted, this is a work of fiction, and doing this does not fit the story Robinson has planned.
quote:
Squatter's rights. Or, better put, people who are there first have more power. The Americans and Russians obviously thought that those that were there first would give those countries more of a toehold than anyone else that came later. Remember, Frank was the US Secretary to Mars, and because he was on of the first, you can bet he had more of voice than, say, the Japanese Secretary, etc. |
But why would the American' knowing there are only 35(?) Americans on Mars, allow 100s of non-Americans to go to Mars and set up shop on their own? When they've help foot most of the bill. And the same goes for the Russians. It doesn't matter who is there first, it's about who has the most people there, the larger foothold. Whoever has that will inevitably be the more important political figure.
And the supposed reverence for the First 100 in the book I really didn't find believable. Sure, they may be popular back on earth, but once someone gets to Mars, would they really care that much? I doubt it. I'd be like "Hey, nice to meet you John Boone, now get the hell out of my way because I've got a mining operation to set up for my transnational." If I'm on Mars, I really don't care who was there first. The fact that I'm there is what really matters.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
|
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:27
|
|
Yes, some technology could have applications back on Earth, but it still wouldn't solve the problems of rampant overcrowding.
quote:
But why would the American' knowing there are only 35(?) Americans on Mars, allow 100s of non-Americans to go to Mars and set up shop on their own? When they've help foot most of the bill. And the same goes for the Russians. It doesn't matter who is there first, it's about who has the most people there, the larger foothold. Whoever has that will inevitably be the more important political figure. |
Why wouldn't they? Allow American and Russians to get set up before others come up. I mean, really, you think they could have prevented other countries from coming to Mars? At least this way, they could control how long American and Russian people had exclusive control.
I think it was obvious though, that later settlements were not financed by the US or Russia, but by the UN itself.
quote:
And the supposed reverence for the First 100 in the book I really didn't find believable. Sure, they may be popular back on earth, but once someone gets to Mars, would they really care that much? I doubt it. I'd be like "Hey, nice to meet you John Boone, now get the hell out of my way because I've got a mining operation to set up for my transnational." If I'm on Mars, I really don't care who was there first |
I guess that's another problem with our views on the book . I found it to be VERY believable. They would be heros. Hell, Buzz Aldren, Niel Armstrong, etc are ALL world famous and if they said anything about space travel, they'd be listened to.
Imagine having someone like that in a small Martian community. The sense of awe at finding the first people on Mars would be overwhelming. They are utter celebrities. Not only are they the first, but also television celebrities. Remember, Robinson foresees the rise of reality television. These people become larger than life.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Rogan Josh
|
|
As I have stated before, I didn't like Red Mars. This is mainly, I think, because it is everything which is bad about science fiction. It fails on every level.
First of all, character development is either non-existent, stereotyped, or highly inconsistent. To me, it comes across as if most of the original 100 are deranged loonies - they all seem to be highly unstable, and I am left thinking "If this is the best 100 Earth can find, God help us al!". But I don't think this is deliberate - it is just poor writing ability on the part of KSR.
Look at John. Atmittedly, his 'character' seems more stable, and I think this is because KSR doesn't have to think one up for him - he is a stereotype. The 'good ol' American boy'. Please... Then there is Frank, whose character I can't possibly describe because he doesn't have one. No-one can really be that shallow (can they?  ). Arkady, Sax (as a scientist, this is the one that annoys me most - the nerd), Ann and Phylis are all stereotypes, and lets leave Maya to one side please.
Hiroko, to me, is the most ridiculous part. First of all, it seems silly that someone could stow away aboard the ship and not be noticed. Even if he 'Coyote' could get into the ship before take off and survive the launch, he would have to remain hidden for the entire flight to Mars. Come on, this is supposed to be a well planned expedition - not a school outing. The landing, the description of which is woefully incomplete but presumably is done in capsules, would surely let the coyote out of the bag.
Then there is the technical side. First of all, the timeframe is way wrong. The book wasn't written all that long ago (early '90s) so it shouldn't be that bad, but KSR has the first Mars colony by 2030. Even setting this to 2040, it is completely unbelievable. Then the colonization of Mars happens far too fast - they even have a space elevator 30 years latter!! . I suspect this is purely for plot/character reasons. In order to keep the original characters around, KSR has to move the colonization at a quick pace. It is for this reason too that the longevity treatment comes in someway through the book.
It all seems far too easy. I don't know the specifics of launching space flights from Mars' reduced gravity, but would it really be viable for a new colony to be sending missions to Phobos and back again regularly. Would this not need lots of rocket fuel? If it is feasible why doesn't KRS explain how? There are so many bits and pieces like that that are glossed over, and it only gets worse further into the book.
Then there is the water issue, the importance of making everything radiation hard, their seemingly endless supply of spare parts....
Look how much preparation the Iraq war took. Do you really think that Earth governments would be able to send an invasion fleet to Mars in 60 years time? 
Finally, Swiss nomads As someone who works in Switzerland, the Swiss would be the last people I would expect to see colonizing Mars!
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
JohnT
|
 |
Capitalist
Mar 1999
time: 00:27
|
|
Rogan "Look how much preparation the Iraq war took. Do you really think that Earth governments would be able to send an invasion fleet to Mars in 60 years time?"
Yeah, I do.
I, too, was initially amused at how well funded the trip was, and I was pleased to note that the Earth would (apparently) have a functional and well-used Terra-based space infrastructure within 30-45 years. However, I don't think the events of this book are impossible on the timescales mentioned given a serious, dedicated long-term effort to solving these problems. If the govt's of the Earth decided to ante up $.5-1.0 trillion per year to space development then we could start to colonize Mars by 2030. I don't know about building the space elevator (much less 2 of them), but we do understand the principles of one and can divert, say, $25 billion/year to research "Space Elevator tech."
In short: I don't expect to see it done, but I think we could do it.
Frankly, I'm just salivating about the orbital, automated factories.
"Then there is Frank, whose character I can't possibly describe because he doesn't have one. No-one can really be that shallow (can they? ). "
Frank isn't driven by shallowness, he's driven by anger and fear, and yes: I know people like this.
I also liked Maya. She just wanted to be loved, and what's wrong with that?
Static Imho, the reverance afforded the first 100 is completely believable - you think the cult of celebrity is going to die on Earth?
"In my view, certainly the advances pioneered on Mars have direct application back on earth, in terms of chemistry, biophysics, whatever. Desalination is expensive and energy-consuming now, given the advanced chemical engineering they do on Mars, it's simply not believable to me that some of those processes wouldn't make it back to earth and be used for these purposes."
Did I miss a passage in the book that stated that they weren't? Obviously Mars returns a good investment, both for corporations and governments alike - they keep shipping people there in cattle cars, sure enough. The problem with people is that, at heart, we are still animals with a genetic compulsion to fill our ecological niche, and any efficiencies gained by new technologies will be exploited by the additional babies we create to use these resources.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Static Universe
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JohnT
Static Imho, the reverance afforded the first 100 is completely believable - you think the cult of celebrity is going to die on Earth?
|
My point is that when people get to Mars they are likely to be less reverent. Familiarity breeds contempt, after all. I'm surprised there aren't more conspiracy theorists in the future who put two and two together Frank and the Arabs, and the Arabs murder of Boone.
quote:
Did I miss a passage in the book that stated that they weren't? Obviously Mars returns a good investment, both for corporations and governments alike - they keep shipping people there in cattle cars, sure enough. The problem with people is that, at heart, we are still animals with a genetic compulsion to fill our ecological niche, and any efficiencies gained by new technologies will be exploited by the additional babies we create to use these resources. |
Robinson's use of the "longevity vaccine" pretty much forces even more population problems on earth anyway, regardless of whatever use the earth might get from Mars technology. Another way Robinson compresses the time frame to fit the story, which I just don't like.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
CyberGnu
|
 |
of the Virtual Serengeti
Apr 1999
time: 05:27
|
|
Hmm, maybe you have to be a trained engineer to fully appreciate many of the engineering aspects of the novel... It didn't occur to me to look at it from that angle, but now that I do, I realize that much of the engineering is left unspoken but assumed.
Static, you mentioned fuel for Phobos missions? Well, very early in the book they mention that they sent huge airminers to mars several years before the colonists, and one of the chemicals they strip is ammonia. The ammonia is converted to hydrazine, which they use to power their tractors. But hydrazine is also used as rocket fuel. It's not as efficient as a solid fuel rocket, but it doesn't have to be in mars low gravity. This is left unspoken, but to me it made sense, based on the knowledge I have of hydrazine...
Many of the technical issues you have with this book, Static, are dependant on one single thing: energy. If we had unlimited amounts of energy, we could easily turn the Sahara into a garden. (Imran: we'd probably **** up the parts around it the first couple of times, but eventually we'd get it right ). But we don't, not unless we get cold fusion to work.
On mars, you have an endless supply of sunlight. With selfsufficient orbital factories and no atmosphere interfering it is just a question of time and silicon to create vast solar receptors which then beams down energy to the surface.
Now, even with the futuristic technology in Red Mars, this isn;t possible for earth. Safety reasons prohibit the build of the solar satelite system in the first case (in case the beam is sent with just a few degrees error that could kill millions of people), and even if the engineering question could be solved, what would we do with the waste heat? The best of chemical processes usually get an energy efficiency of about 50%, which means that if we want to beam down energy to desalinate enough water to irrigate the saharas, we would have to add enough heat to increase the earth's temperature.
On mars, that isn't a problem, since they want to add energy...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CyberGnu
|
|
of the Virtual Serengeti
Apr 1999
time: 05:27
|
|
quote:
"Then there is Frank, whose character I can't possibly describe because he doesn't have one. No-one can really be that shallow (can they? ). "
Frank isn't driven by shallowness, he's driven by anger and fear, and yes: I know people like this.
I also liked Maya. She just wanted to be loved, and what's wrong with that?
|
I'd like to add that one of my friends is a copy of Sax... and if I had to pick three or four people to send to mars, he would be one of them.
Funny thing: One of the things you learn in engineering school is how incredibly unsuitable your classmates (and yourself) feel for most of the jobs you assume goes to responsible, competent people. Out of the 120 people who started with me, I would trust maybe five of them to run a nuclear power plant... But the take-home message here is that humans are humans, and they usually leave their quirks, peculiarities, strange hobbies and drunk behaviour at home. I've yet to hear of a project failing because the two head engineers were in a love triangle with a third...
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-05-2003 23:45
what? 
(I have the same paperback from the first post)
even though some are quite unbelievable (the windmills)
|