The Starship "I risk sending a thread off topic" Homeless Posts Thread 2

[Robotbeat]

I think if people go intending to settle rather than just explore/do science, it will be found out fairly quickly, honestly. Having children in the new area is kind of a core part of settlement.

But yeah Earth born people would remain the vast majority for a very long time. I do think there'd be some "regression to the mean" anyway though as populations increased and emigrating to Mars became less exceptional.

Maybe you are right and I hope it works out well. But I wouldn't want to have to deal with a child on Mars with some skeletal problem or other handicap.

I'm not saying it'll be terribly safe.  And Mars settlement isn't guaranteed to work - even if Starship sends people there successfully, it could end up like current Antarctic scientific outposts.

But what I don't see as plausible is a significant number of people going with the intention to settle permanently, and still no kids being born there for decades and decades.

(I personally think it will be basically fine*, that biologically Mars gravity will be vastly more like Earth gravity than zero g. But I can't *prove* that to anyone's satisfaction.

*more accurately, that there will likely be some increased development risk relative to 'ideal' conditions, but not risk out of scope to common non-ideal but generally considered 'normal' conditions for pregnancy on Earth. )

And having a space station in orbit around mars with rotating 1g could help with kids living there for a percentage of time to help development.

almost certainly unnecessary and you can do this on the ground, too.

[Robotbeat]

I think that *if* Mars becomes a real society (more than an ISS style, or even Antarctica style, "outpost/base" but more like a town or city built in remote areas on Earth before modern super-rapid travel, e.g. 19th century Salt Lake City) there will be a lot of spinoffs for Earth, technological and maybe societal too.

 I think the mere existence of this kind of "modern frontier" will make a surprisingly big difference, for one thing.

Also, a Mars effort on this scale won't exist by itself. The Starship launch rate implied would mean really cheap launch costs, which would make all kinds of things practical to do in space that aren't practical today.  Especially since Mars travel is synod based, there will be a lot of "spare capacity" at other times of the synodal cycle. In a world where this exists, it's hard to see there *not* being private space stations of some sort, likely space manufacturing, maybe even space solar power

I also think a society on Mars in the "intermediate stage" when it's more than just a base but most of the adult population is still Earth-born would be very different from any society that's ever existed on Earth, since it would be really strongly self-selected in ways I really can't think of a historical analogue to. Eventually there'd be "regression to the mean" as the Mars-born generations grew up and came to make up more and more of the population, but depending on the rate of population movement from Earth to Mars vs Martian birthrate, that state might last a really long time. It's hard to know what kind of spinoffs could arise from a fundamentally different society.

The spinoffs from any Mars base have tremendous potential, but I suspect that everyone there will be Earth born for a very long time. We don't know if gestation and birth would be safe on Mars (currently an open question). It's safe in 1g, but I doubt very much it is safe in 0g and as for 0.34g who knows. At the very least it's going to take a long time to find out given the multiple ethical issues involved and the likely backlash if anything goes wrong.

we know for sure that 0g is not viable for embryogenesis.

development in 0.34g seems quite likely to result in deformities.

I think if people go intending to settle rather than just explore/do science, it will be found out fairly quickly, honestly. Having children in the new area is kind of a core part of settlement.

But yeah Earth born people would remain the vast majority for a very long time. I do think there'd be some "regression to the mean" anyway though as populations increased and emigrating to Mars became less exceptional.

Maybe you are right and I hope it works out well. But I wouldn't want to have to deal with a child on Mars with some skeletal problem or other handicap.

I'm not saying it'll be terribly safe.  And Mars settlement isn't guaranteed to work - even if Starship sends people there successfully, it could end up like current Antarctic scientific outposts.

But what I don't see as plausible is a significant number of people going with the intention to settle permanently, and still no kids being born there for decades and decades.

(I personally think it will be basically fine*, that biologically Mars gravity will be vastly more like Earth gravity than zero g. But I can't *prove* that to anyone's satisfaction.

*more accurately, that there will likely be some increased development risk relative to 'ideal' conditions, but not risk out of scope to common non-ideal but generally considered 'normal' conditions for pregnancy on Earth. )

Kids have been born in Antarctica.

Antarctica is one of those things that people keep refusing to do even the basic level of research on before making claims about the status quo there.

[Slarty1080]

Snip

Kids have been born in Antarctica.

Antarctica is one of those things that people keep refusing to do even the basic level of research on before making claims about the status quo there.

Yes, but the key issue is the effect of 0g and although giving birth in Antarctica no doubt has many issues it is at 1g, so avoids all the key issues we are talking about.

[Vultur]

we know for sure that 0g is not viable for embryogenesis.

Wait, do we? I remember rodent pregnancy research that saw some problems (lack of righting reflex, IIRC) but not on that scale.

Kids have been born in Antarctica.

Antarctica is one of those things that people keep refusing to do even the basic level of research on before making claims about the status quo there.

Yeah, an Antarctica style situation is not incompatible with having kids there. But full settlement pretty much implies people will.

[alang]

I think if people go intending to settle rather than just explore/do science, it will be found out fairly quickly, honestly. Having children in the new area is kind of a core part of settlement.

But yeah Earth born people would remain the vast majority for a very long time. I do think there'd be some "regression to the mean" anyway though as populations increased and emigrating to Mars became less exceptional.

Maybe you are right and I hope it works out well. But I wouldn't want to have to deal with a child on Mars with some skeletal problem or other handicap.

I'm not saying it'll be terribly safe.  And Mars settlement isn't guaranteed to work - even if Starship sends people there successfully, it could end up like current Antarctic scientific outposts.

But what I don't see as plausible is a significant number of people going with the intention to settle permanently, and still no kids being born there for decades and decades.

(I personally think it will be basically fine*, that biologically Mars gravity will be vastly more like Earth gravity than zero g. But I can't *prove* that to anyone's satisfaction.

*more accurately, that there will likely be some increased development risk relative to 'ideal' conditions, but not risk out of scope to common non-ideal but generally considered 'normal' conditions for pregnancy on Earth. )

Natural selection will inevitably result in people who want to have children, whatever the circumstances. Religions might also arise or adapt to respond to new circumstances.
If becoming space faring requires genetic engineering then it still might happen. Science fiction went there a long time ago.

[spacenut]

I don't think conceiving and carrying a child and actually giving birth will have any affect on the mother.  Might actually be easier.  The child is in water, so gravity might not be a problem.  The children, however, growing up in .38g might not develop bones and muscles as strong as a 1g child.  Unless there is centrifuges on the surface, or a 1g Babylon 5 type station, O'Neill station or such to provide the proper gravity for bone and muscle growth.  Just 0.38g alone might be enough for balance to develop.  Time will tell. 

I personally think NASA should use Starship or other reusable launchers to build a spinning space station with a ring for 0.38g Martian gravity as well as 1g in an outer ring to do a variety of long term experiments before committing to a long term Mars colony.  We already know 6 months is about the maximum someone can safely be in zero g.  We need to know the other degrees of gravity and it's affects on the human body. 

[meekGee]

I think if people go intending to settle rather than just explore/do science, it will be found out fairly quickly, honestly. Having children in the new area is kind of a core part of settlement.

But yeah Earth born people would remain the vast majority for a very long time. I do think there'd be some "regression to the mean" anyway though as populations increased and emigrating to Mars became less exceptional.

Maybe you are right and I hope it works out well. But I wouldn't want to have to deal with a child on Mars with some skeletal problem or other handicap.

There's only one way to find out, with all the down sides that you mention. People have kids in many high-risk environments. It's how we do.

The alternative is to not do it, and that's not really an alternative.

It'll happen, and we can do a landing bingo, but I think it'll happen qith 1-2 synods.

[Twark_Main]

we know for sure that 0g is not viable for embryogenesis.

development in 0.34g seems quite likely to result in deformities.

[citation needed] for the bold claim...

[meekGee]

we know for sure that 0g is not viable for embryogenesis.

development in 0.34g seems quite likely to result in deformities.

[citation needed] for the bold claim...

We all seen it with our own eyes!  The mutants!  And they have powers!

All that, while absolutely acknowledging it's a risk.  How about the first crew brings some mammals with them, and maybe refrain from starting pregnancies until they have some baby whatevers?   As an aside, animals are real good at converting low grade agricultural product into stuff we can eat.

[Vultur]

The children, however, growing up in .38g might not develop bones and muscles as strong as a 1g child. 

I have been wondering about this one for a while. Depending on the mindset of the people who go, I can see this (great difficulty in Mars born people returning to Earth) becoming seen as a kind of "we're committed now", "burning the ships" kind of a cultural watershed thing. I could see a Mars settlement choosing *not* to build centrifuges because it would be a sign that they're willing to "back out"!

  Just 0.38g alone might be enough for balance to develop.  Time will tell. 

I would be utterly astonished if it was not.

I personally think NASA should use Starship or other reusable launchers to build a spinning space station with a ring for 0.38g Martian gravity as well as 1g in an outer ring to do a variety of long term experiments before committing to a long term Mars colony. 

NASA is not committing to a long term Mars colony. SpaceX / Elon Musk are. And clearly Musk does not believe a ring station is on the critical path to Mars.

We already know 6 months is about the maximum someone can safely be in zero g. 

Not sure I agree with that. Effects show up sooner than that, and people have been in zero g significantly longer (up to 14 months at a stretch). I don't think that 6 months in zero g is any kind of threshold/limit.

Even if you rule out Polyakov's 14 months as happening under different safety rules, modern NASA seems quite ok with longer stays (Vande Hei & Rubio both had year stays in the last four years).

[Eka]

we know for sure that 0g is not viable for embryogenesis.

development in 0.34g seems quite likely to result in deformities.

[citation needed] for the bold claim...

We all seen it with our own eyes!  The mutants!  And they have powers!

All that, while absolutely acknowledging it's a risk.  How about the first crew brings some mammals with them, and maybe refrain from starting pregnancies until they have some baby whatevers?   As an aside, animals are real good at converting low grade agricultural product into stuff we can eat.

I often joke "Who will eat the grass?" in reference to non row crop suitable land here on earth. There are huge areas of ag land where row crops can't be grown, but will support cattle, sheep, and goats. Cows, goats, and sheep can turn many of the non human edible parts of plants into human edible food. Catfish also can. One would need to convert the plant refuse into pellets for them to eat. Actually many types of fish can do the conversion. An interesting one is tadpoles. Many species are grazers on algae and plants. One would have to harvest them before they turn into frogs and change diets.

What is the life expectancy of a mouse in a chicken yard? Peck, peck, gulp. Chickens can eat seeds and grains, but they prefer insects, and other much higher protein foods like mice. They aren't cellulose eaters like geese are. I don't know of any bird that would be good to bring.

Of course, all this plant matter has an important use, compost. Compost for making more soil for growing more food in. Especially types of plants that don't like hydroponics.

[rsdavis9]

we know for sure that 0g is not viable for embryogenesis.

development in 0.34g seems quite likely to result in deformities.

[citation needed] for the bold claim...

We all seen it with our own eyes!  The mutants!  And they have powers!

All that, while absolutely acknowledging it's a risk.  How about the first crew brings some mammals with them, and maybe refrain from starting pregnancies until they have some baby whatevers?   As an aside, animals are real good at converting low grade agricultural product into stuff we can eat.

Haven't they done mice pregnancy and birth on the space station?
It seems like a no-brainer to have been done already?
 

[BN]

we know for sure that 0g is not viable for embryogenesis.

development in 0.34g seems quite likely to result in deformities.

[citation needed] for the bold claim...

well there's been a lot of research on this, most of which has been very discouraging but apparently a more recent study found that one phase of development proceed fairly normally with mice embryos. why it is that the latest results seem to conflict with multiple experiments in prior research, I am not sure.

this is a good meta-analysis abstract of the research so far:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949907024000445

Many simulated micro-gravity (micro-G) experiments on earth suggest that micro-G conditions are not compatible with early mammalian embryo development. Recently, the first two “space embryo” studies have been published showing that early mouse embryo development can occur in real microgravity (real micro-G) conditions in orbit. In the first of these studies, published in 2020, Lei and collaborators developed automated mini-incubator (AMI) devices for mouse embryos facilitating cultivation, microscopic observation, and fixation1. Within these AMI apparatuses, 3400 non-frozen 2-cell embryos were launched in a recoverable satellite, experiencing sustained microgravity (∼0.001G) for 64 ​h post-orbit before fixation in space and recovery on earth. In a subsequent study, in 2023, Wakayama and colleagues2 devised Embryo Thawing and Culturing (ETC) devices, enabling manual thawing, cultivation, and fixation of frozen 2-cell mouse embryos by a trained astronaut aboard the International Space Station (ISS). Within the ETCs, a total of 720 2-cell mouse embryos underwent thawing and cultivation for 4 days on the ISS, subject to either microgravity (n ​= ​360) and simulated-1G (n ​= ​360) conditions. The primary findings from both space embryo experiments indicate that mouse embryos can progress through embryogenesis from the 2-cell stage to the blastocyst stage under real micro-G conditions with few defects. Collectively, these studies propose the potential for mammalian reproduction under real micro-G conditions, challenging earlier simulated micro-G research suggesting otherwise.

and the more recent (and more optimistic) paper:

https://www.cell.com/iscience/fulltext/S2589-0042(23)02254-X

[rsdavis9]

Well after skimming(title and discussion) of the sciencedirect paper. It appears that radiation is a bigger concern.

[Vultur]

I often joke "Who will eat the grass?" in reference to non row crop suitable land here on earth. There are huge areas of ag land where row crops can't be grown, but will support cattle, sheep, and goats. Cows, goats, and sheep can turn many of the non human edible parts of plants into human edible food.

This is certainly true on Earth,  but these areas tend to be large expenses of relatively dry grassland, savanna, or semi-desert. I would expect Mars agriculture to be vastly more concentrated since you'd have to pressurize all the volume for any conventional plants* to grow.

*supposedly some lichens can grow in Mars atmosphere, but vascular plants need oxygen in the atmosphere - even though they produce net oxygen they can't pipe it directly to the roots.

Catfish also can. One would need to convert the plant refuse into pellets for them to eat. Actually many types of fish can do the conversion.

Fish seem extremely likely, probably as part of a larger water agricultural system with algae, mollusks, shrimp or crawfish, etc.

[Eka]

we know for sure that 0g is not viable for embryogenesis.

development in 0.34g seems quite likely to result in deformities.

[citation needed] for the bold claim...

We all seen it with our own eyes!  The mutants!  And they have powers!

All that, while absolutely acknowledging it's a risk.  How about the first crew brings some mammals with them, and maybe refrain from starting pregnancies until they have some baby whatevers?   As an aside, animals are real good at converting low grade agricultural product into stuff we can eat.

Haven't they done mice pregnancy and birth on the space station?
It seems like a no-brainer to have been done already?

4 days growth only.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2399067-mouse-embryos-have-been-grown-in-space-for-the-first-time/

There has been a clear lack of research.

[Oersted]

I, for one, would happily volunteer to impregnate suitable specimens on a trip to Mars!

....Cue Dr. Merkwürdigliebe vibes...

[Oersted]

On another topic, there was a lot of talk about interesting statements by Elon on SpaceX at the Qatar Economic Forum, but the interview was basically about everything else than space...

[BN]

On another topic, there was a lot of talk about interesting statements by Elon on SpaceX at the Qatar Economic Forum, but the interview was basically about everything else than space...

So unless we take Elon at his word, he is making secret deals with Putin, who he talks to all the time while developing evil space weapons, boosting AIDS in order to murder poor children and leveraging his connections to Trump by being able to do business in South Africa without either himself being black, or Starlink being 30% black-owned.

Was there anything technology related in this?

[BN]

we know for sure that 0g is not viable for embryogenesis.

development in 0.34g seems quite likely to result in deformities.

[citation needed] for the bold claim...

We all seen it with our own eyes!  The mutants!  And they have powers!

All that, while absolutely acknowledging it's a risk.  How about the first crew brings some mammals with them, and maybe refrain from starting pregnancies until they have some baby whatevers?   As an aside, animals are real good at converting low grade agricultural product into stuff we can eat.

Haven't they done mice pregnancy and birth on the space station?
It seems like a no-brainer to have been done already?

4 days growth only.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2399067-mouse-embryos-have-been-grown-in-space-for-the-first-time/

There has been a clear lack of research.

I wonder if there has been a reluctance to do more given the potential ethical backlash. The best way to know is to just let some mice bang up there. Probably a lot more informative and affordable than all this centrifugal, controlled embryogenic research.

I suppose this may be one of the upsides to having private commercial research stations in orbit. Although, I suspect that we'll get these sorts of results from the Tiangong station sooner than later.