World Trade Organization but yeah, that's essentially the WTO's mandate really. They act as negotiators and mediators to resolve disputes quickly. (in theory)
well, it could be set up that way, but you know eventually as technologies improve and we move toward a FTL based trade system, the system government will become stronger.
World Trade Organization but yeah, that's essentially the WTO's mandate really. They act as negotiators and mediators to resolve disputes quickly. (in theory)
Thanks, I had a hunch that was what it stood for, but I couldn't be sure if I was making it up... When I was seven, I did a piece of writing at school, and thought I'd invented the word 'aquanaut' (felt all proud of myself) Turns out I didn't...
well, it could be set up that way, but you know eventually as technologies improve and we move toward a FTL based trade system, the system government will become stronger.
Again, why do you think there needs to be a larger government governing both entities? If there were to be a system government, it shouldn't be based on Earth, Mars or Io (my favorite moon) because any one place would risk appearance of bias. A bit like the nonsense of Paris being the seat for the Federation making Trek look very Human-centric (beyond the obvious budgetary restrictions of showing more alien races) Arguably, it would be better for the Federation government to sit, not on a member world, but on some arbitrary asteroid/starbase, to better allow for impartiality
I don't want a world government, I like having a choice of countries to live in.
Can you imagine how corrupt people with that much power would become!?! We're talking communism, fascism, totalitarian dictatorship etc. And nowhere else to escape to. I don't trust politicians and anyone who does is stupid beyond belief.
I don't want a world government, I like having a choice of countries to live in.
Can you imagine how corrupt people with that much power would become!?! We're talking communism, fascism, totalitarian dictatorship etc. And nowhere else to escape to. I don't trust politicians and anyone who does is stupid beyond belief.
Totally agree with you on that point... But as for 'having a choice of countries to live in', try rolling up on America's shores without going through the immigration process and seeing how much 'freedom of movement' you have
There won't be any "FTL-based trade system" in The Expanse; it's based on technologies with at least some basis in real-world physics as we understand them, which precludes FTL of any sort.
Which is again the problem with trying to run Mars from Earth - even with constant-boost ships accelerating at 1g, you're looking at trip times ranging from three days to weeks, depending on where Earth and Mars are in their orbits. (That three-day trip time is available only for a period of a few days once every two years, as the planets are closest to each other at that point.) By the time Earth mounted a punitive expedition to put down a rebellion, it might be over already.
That's true, we wouldn't be able to do anything in a pre-ftl technological situation. Eventually FTL will happen though
Not necessarily, pretty much all FTL theories are openly predicated on the assumption that they will one day discover a way to circumvent physics by artificially reducing an objects mass. So in other words they hope they will one day find pixie dust that will let them fly if they think happy enough thoughts.
actually no, Lord. The problem lies in energy. It is possible, but requires a large amount of energy... an amount that is reducing.
Whoops, you're right about it being energy as the key driver behind FTL theories. My train of thought was on the next step ahead on that, where many theories are trying to fudge the math on the energy equations by either altering the formulas to get a better outcome or by trying to reduce the mass being moved. Even with all that tinkering around with the math it is all in the realm of theory right now and there is no guarantee any of the math will hold up under practical testing.
actually no, Lord. The problem lies in energy. It is possible, but requires a large amount of energy... an amount that is reducing.
No. It requires a specific type of energy. Stabilizing wormholes or distorting space time as required for the Alcubierre drive. both requires negative energy. For now, this is pretty much the same as unicorn blood or pixie dust. It's not just a matter of scale.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
reducing mass will reduce the energy requirements too as well... there are problems with creating FTL drives. The theory is sound, but impossible at the moment to test.
More accurately, Alcubierre-White theory is internally consistent. It remains to be seen whether it actually describes anything in the real world. (Consistent theories aren't necessarily true - phlogiston theory was internally consistent, and seemed to make sense before we discovered the existence of oxygen...)
Sounds like a cool show. I was wondering what kind of timeline we are talking about for the Martian colonization? Is the planet terraformed or are people still living in artificial environments?
The more wiggle room people have they typically want more freedom. If you want subjects you have to keep them under heel or at least keep them dependent on you. An environmentally hostile Mars while far away is still tractable by dependence on Terran resources/manufacturing. As survival is an ever present concern there isn't as much free time and people are occupied by duties which keeps them occupied and less likely to rebel.
The ruler of a colony constantly has to run the numbers and ask themself what they get out of a colony. Producing initial infrastructure to support life there would be huge so there is a reluctance to destroy it outright if colonists get surly. There would have to be some resource to exploit to colonize in the first place that isn't available at home. Of course if colonization is a result of the state of the Earth the dynamic is turned on it's head and the colony itself would actually have the power while the Earth would be sweating while watching the clock tick down. This scenario is scarier because desperation might result in rash action.
If I were trying to organize a colony I probably be integrating canisters of a nerve agent into the building blocks of the prefabs so I could kill everyone if they crossed me and then I could occupy the structures without opposition after they all died horribly.
They'd only be beholden to Earth until they developed their own resources. The thing that Mars is critically short of is nitrogen; everything else is there in sufficient supply for enclosed habitats (although they might want to go mine water in the asteroids, and save what's on Mars to refine into fuel - the briny ooze detected on Mars seems to be high in perchlorates, which are a major ingredient in rocket fuel). Given a supply of nitrogen, and some asteroidal ice, they could set up subterranean (subarean?) farms to grow food in, which move would also help them recycle the carbon dioxide into oxygen (which can also be derived from the ice). Once the colony has that, who needs Earth?
Fun part is, the Terran authorities would probably be encouraging this development, as it would make maintaining the colony cheaper...
Now that that is out of the way, here is the reason that Earth will NOT endorse an extraterrestrial colony. Gravity. Just that. Don't believe me, check sci-fi as far back as "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress". Any basic "tug" style of space vessel could simply divert a couple of asteroids so that do a "Dino Smash" on the earth. Or use smaller ones with steering rockets (remote controlled or using an on board targeting computer) for a city by city "display" of power.
This would give whoever gets it first the upper hand, but only so long as they are the only name in the game. If they don't do it then they will have lost the chance. The next government in the game leads to either a "Cold War" or "Dooms Day".
Mars colony is not truly step 1 either. Step one needs to be Earth orbit . A truly working space station. Able to construct step two (the mining and refining operation in (well, near) the asteroid belt).
The colonies are a distant third step, owing to the need for raw materials to actually construct them (though 3D Printing may alleviate that a lot).
Many of the special materials used here on earth every day just do not exist on the moon, Mars, or even the asteroids. And all of those special materials are here, at the bottom of Earth's gravity well. Which makes everything that can be made via local resources and 3D Printing a blessing.
And one final thought. I mentioned the "Dino Smash" earlier, and the Earth is still wide open to disaster (not just massive impacts). A large enough human population scattered as widely as possible would at least help protect the species.
I have heard that with enough diversity and planning a population as small as fifty thousand can sustain the species.
But try to imagine the number of "Cruise Ship" transports to move the population between planets, shuttle missions to load & unload those transports, feeding them in transit, finding volunteers...
why is Mars not under the same government as Earth? If we were to expand out to the Inner Belt, would we maintain a united government? Or would we split into factions?
Earth would have little to do with Mars and Mars little to do with Earth. We don't even have a unified world government right now (and we wouldn't want one unless you're totally insane). Russians would reject US rule and we would reject Russian rule, for example... how much more stern would the divide between peoples be if the distance between them were literally well over a year of travel at high speed in deep space? Furthermore there would only be specific windows that travel between Earth and Mars would be efficient and it's doubtful they'd ignore these windows if we had colonies on Mars.
The truth is if there were any sizable population on Mars, the conditions would be different, the economy would be different (there would be nearly no trade between Mars and Earth because you're talking huge sums of fuel for extremely expensive specialty craft to move stuff back and forth - so the economies would be very separate except for basically information commodities which are not remotely the foundation of human life). Therefore, the government would be different. The people of Mars would have vastly different interests than the people of Earth.
"At the end of the movie, I really care about what happens to the characters … but I’m pretty much missing Gene Roddenberry in J.J.’s interpretation … and at the end of the day, that’s just not OK for me." - Levar Burton
"[OrciTrek] doesn’t have the story heart that the best of my Star Trek had," - William Shatner
"It doesn’t have that element that made … Gene Roddenberry‘s ‘Star Trek,’ what it was." - George Takei
"The Gene Roddenberry years, when stories might play with questions of science, ideals or philosophy, have been replaced by stories reduced to loud and colorful action." - Roger Ebert
Crabby, nothing except expense and the dwindling remains of sanity is preventing someone from pulling a Colony Dropright now. We have the technology - barely, but we do have it. Hell, the USAF had a plan outlined - Project Thor - that would orbit satellites filled with, basically, crowbars with guidance fins and just enough computing power to compensate for atmospheric buffering; the plan was to destroy targets by filling the area with hundred-pound iron bars falling point-first at meteoric velocities. It's been shelved, but the plans exist.
On the other hand, the Loonies in The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress were only able to launch the attack they did because the Lunar Authority had graciously given them a magnetic cannon aimed at Earth. It was intended to launch return capsules filled with wheat, which would land (relatively) softly thanks to retrorockets - but as Mike pointed out, all you had to do was fill them with rock and remove the retros to make the cannon a weapon. Don't want that to happen? Don't give life-sentence prisoners a gigantic cannon aimed right at your head.
On the gripping hand, it's frequently said that there are no secrets in space. Anything you do can be seen for several million miles around, limited only by how much energy you're using and speed-of-light lag in the transmission of that data. And it takes a lot of energy to shift an asteroid's orbit; most of the low-hanging fruit in terms of delta-V has already been swept up by Earth (hence all those mass extinctions in the fossil record). It's highly unlikely that our Martian rebels could attack Earth with giant rocks. It's also highly unnecessary - as has been pointed out, trip times to Mars are not short, are practical only once every two years, and don't lend themselves well to warfare. All the Martians have to do is hold their territory and wait EarthGov out.
Not if you already seeded their habs for destruction. The two year journey wouldn't be a war fleet but the next lot of colonists that were hopefully more tractable. I think it's the most cost effective means as no assets on Mars would be damaged and in this scenario distance and isolation would be our ally. Unless you wanted to use the fear of spontaneous execution as a future deterrent no one ever need know the preventative measures you had put in place; Much the better you don't a people who see themselves as prisoners will seek escape and work to circumvent our deathtrap. After the fact we are left with a pristine colony waiting for new colonists. It would be better not to share the information so the next group so wouldn't see it coming; Distance=Control of Dessemination=Good. Explain the fatalities as human error or some defect that required correction on site; space is a dangerous and unforgiving place and accidents happen. The fallacy of structural corrections would allow some "construction/alterations" so you could replenish your gas stores if required.
Not if you already seeded their habs for destruction. The two year journey wouldn't be a war fleet but the next lot of colonists that were hopefully more tractable. I think it's the most cost effective means as no assets on Mars would be damaged and in this scenario distance and isolation would be our ally. Unless you wanted to use the fear of spontaneous execution as a future deterrent no one ever need know the preventative measures you had put in place; Much the better you don't a people who see themselves as prisoners will seek escape and work to circumvent our deathtrap. After the fact we are left with a pristine colony waiting for new colonists. It would be better not to share the information so the next group so wouldn't see it coming; Distance=Control of Dessemination=Good. Explain the fatalities as human error or some defect that required correction on site; space is a dangerous and unforgiving place and accidents happen. The fallacy of structural corrections would allow some "construction/alterations" so you could replenish your gas stores if required.
That might work - once. And only if you then managed to shut off communications from the habs without arousing suspicion on Earth, since you can't exactly sneak a crew in there to clean up the bodies first (space launches are easily visible, because they use a lot of energy, and more speed equals more energy both on departure and arrival). It'll never work a second time, unless you're crewing your habs exclusively with orphans under the age of six. Older than that, and even kids will smell a rat.
Comments
My character Tsin'xing
Again, why do you think there needs to be a larger government governing both entities? If there were to be a system government, it shouldn't be based on Earth, Mars or Io (my favorite moon) because any one place would risk appearance of bias. A bit like the nonsense of Paris being the seat for the Federation making Trek look very Human-centric (beyond the obvious budgetary restrictions of showing more alien races) Arguably, it would be better for the Federation government to sit, not on a member world, but on some arbitrary asteroid/starbase, to better allow for impartiality
Can you imagine how corrupt people with that much power would become!?! We're talking communism, fascism, totalitarian dictatorship etc. And nowhere else to escape to. I don't trust politicians and anyone who does is stupid beyond belief.
Which is again the problem with trying to run Mars from Earth - even with constant-boost ships accelerating at 1g, you're looking at trip times ranging from three days to weeks, depending on where Earth and Mars are in their orbits. (That three-day trip time is available only for a period of a few days once every two years, as the planets are closest to each other at that point.) By the time Earth mounted a punitive expedition to put down a rebellion, it might be over already.
Not necessarily, pretty much all FTL theories are openly predicated on the assumption that they will one day discover a way to circumvent physics by artificially reducing an objects mass. So in other words they hope they will one day find pixie dust that will let them fly if they think happy enough thoughts.
Whoops, you're right about it being energy as the key driver behind FTL theories. My train of thought was on the next step ahead on that, where many theories are trying to fudge the math on the energy equations by either altering the formulas to get a better outcome or by trying to reduce the mass being moved. Even with all that tinkering around with the math it is all in the realm of theory right now and there is no guarantee any of the math will hold up under practical testing.
The more wiggle room people have they typically want more freedom. If you want subjects you have to keep them under heel or at least keep them dependent on you. An environmentally hostile Mars while far away is still tractable by dependence on Terran resources/manufacturing. As survival is an ever present concern there isn't as much free time and people are occupied by duties which keeps them occupied and less likely to rebel.
The ruler of a colony constantly has to run the numbers and ask themself what they get out of a colony. Producing initial infrastructure to support life there would be huge so there is a reluctance to destroy it outright if colonists get surly. There would have to be some resource to exploit to colonize in the first place that isn't available at home. Of course if colonization is a result of the state of the Earth the dynamic is turned on it's head and the colony itself would actually have the power while the Earth would be sweating while watching the clock tick down. This scenario is scarier because desperation might result in rash action.
If I were trying to organize a colony I probably be integrating canisters of a nerve agent into the building blocks of the prefabs so I could kill everyone if they crossed me and then I could occupy the structures without opposition after they all died horribly.
Fun part is, the Terran authorities would probably be encouraging this development, as it would make maintaining the colony cheaper...
Now that that is out of the way, here is the reason that Earth will NOT endorse an extraterrestrial colony. Gravity. Just that. Don't believe me, check sci-fi as far back as "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress". Any basic "tug" style of space vessel could simply divert a couple of asteroids so that do a "Dino Smash" on the earth. Or use smaller ones with steering rockets (remote controlled or using an on board targeting computer) for a city by city "display" of power.
This would give whoever gets it first the upper hand, but only so long as they are the only name in the game. If they don't do it then they will have lost the chance. The next government in the game leads to either a "Cold War" or "Dooms Day".
Mars colony is not truly step 1 either. Step one needs to be Earth orbit . A truly working space station. Able to construct step two (the mining and refining operation in (well, near) the asteroid belt).
The colonies are a distant third step, owing to the need for raw materials to actually construct them (though 3D Printing may alleviate that a lot).
Many of the special materials used here on earth every day just do not exist on the moon, Mars, or even the asteroids. And all of those special materials are here, at the bottom of Earth's gravity well. Which makes everything that can be made via local resources and 3D Printing a blessing.
And one final thought. I mentioned the "Dino Smash" earlier, and the Earth is still wide open to disaster (not just massive impacts). A large enough human population scattered as widely as possible would at least help protect the species.
I have heard that with enough diversity and planning a population as small as fifty thousand can sustain the species.
But try to imagine the number of "Cruise Ship" transports to move the population between planets, shuttle missions to load & unload those transports, feeding them in transit, finding volunteers...
Earth would have little to do with Mars and Mars little to do with Earth. We don't even have a unified world government right now (and we wouldn't want one unless you're totally insane). Russians would reject US rule and we would reject Russian rule, for example... how much more stern would the divide between peoples be if the distance between them were literally well over a year of travel at high speed in deep space? Furthermore there would only be specific windows that travel between Earth and Mars would be efficient and it's doubtful they'd ignore these windows if we had colonies on Mars.
The truth is if there were any sizable population on Mars, the conditions would be different, the economy would be different (there would be nearly no trade between Mars and Earth because you're talking huge sums of fuel for extremely expensive specialty craft to move stuff back and forth - so the economies would be very separate except for basically information commodities which are not remotely the foundation of human life). Therefore, the government would be different. The people of Mars would have vastly different interests than the people of Earth.
"At the end of the movie, I really care about what happens to the characters … but I’m pretty much missing Gene Roddenberry in J.J.’s interpretation … and at the end of the day, that’s just not OK for me." - Levar Burton
"[OrciTrek] doesn’t have the story heart that the best of my Star Trek had," - William Shatner
"It doesn’t have that element that made … Gene Roddenberry‘s ‘Star Trek,’ what it was." - George Takei
"The Gene Roddenberry years, when stories might play with questions of science, ideals or philosophy, have been replaced by stories reduced to loud and colorful action." - Roger Ebert
On the other hand, the Loonies in The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress were only able to launch the attack they did because the Lunar Authority had graciously given them a magnetic cannon aimed at Earth. It was intended to launch return capsules filled with wheat, which would land (relatively) softly thanks to retrorockets - but as Mike pointed out, all you had to do was fill them with rock and remove the retros to make the cannon a weapon. Don't want that to happen? Don't give life-sentence prisoners a gigantic cannon aimed right at your head.
On the gripping hand, it's frequently said that there are no secrets in space. Anything you do can be seen for several million miles around, limited only by how much energy you're using and speed-of-light lag in the transmission of that data. And it takes a lot of energy to shift an asteroid's orbit; most of the low-hanging fruit in terms of delta-V has already been swept up by Earth (hence all those mass extinctions in the fossil record). It's highly unlikely that our Martian rebels could attack Earth with giant rocks. It's also highly unnecessary - as has been pointed out, trip times to Mars are not short, are practical only once every two years, and don't lend themselves well to warfare. All the Martians have to do is hold their territory and wait EarthGov out.
Not if you already seeded their habs for destruction. The two year journey wouldn't be a war fleet but the next lot of colonists that were hopefully more tractable. I think it's the most cost effective means as no assets on Mars would be damaged and in this scenario distance and isolation would be our ally. Unless you wanted to use the fear of spontaneous execution as a future deterrent no one ever need know the preventative measures you had put in place; Much the better you don't a people who see themselves as prisoners will seek escape and work to circumvent our deathtrap. After the fact we are left with a pristine colony waiting for new colonists. It would be better not to share the information so the next group so wouldn't see it coming; Distance=Control of Dessemination=Good. Explain the fatalities as human error or some defect that required correction on site; space is a dangerous and unforgiving place and accidents happen. The fallacy of structural corrections would allow some "construction/alterations" so you could replenish your gas stores if required.