Science Lit
Popular Science talks to the author of How to Live on Mars about the prospects for a move to the red planet

If you've ever fantasized about going to Mars, you've no doubt thought about how you'd get there, how long it would take, and how you'd survive the planet's frigid temperatures. But you probably never considered things like how to invest your money on Mars, how to have a social life, and where to get a job there. In his new book, How to Live on Mars, Dr. Robert Zubrin moves beyond the idea of humans taking a brief exploratory mission to Mars, and considers what it would take to actually live there. Zubrin is the founder and president of the Mars Society and president of Pioneer Astronautics, an aerospace research and development company in Colorado. Popular Science correspondent Laurie Schmidt recently sat down with Zubrin to discuss his new book and his philosophy about the prospect of humans settling Mars.

How to Live on Mars:  courtesy Random House

Why did you write How to Live on Mars and why now?

I wrote it to excite a new and younger generation. I grew up in the Apollo era, and there needs to be literature to capture the imagination of the new younger generation. In the book there's a vision of a future civilization living and growing on Mars -- it's about creating a new branch of human civilization. As I see it, that new branch will have many of the positive and some of the negative aspects of America when it was young -- a place where the rules haven't been written yet. I think that when humans get around to exploring and building cities and towns on Mars, it will be viewed as one of the great times of humanity, a time when people set foot on another world and had the freedom to make their own world.

There are many different approaches you could have taken to writing a book about living on Mars. You chose to take a lighthearted, humorous approach -- can you tell me why?

It was a new way to reach an additional audience. I told it straight in The Case for Mars, then I told it in the form of an adventure story in First Landing. So this time I decided to try science humor.

Why do you think it's important for humans to colonize Mars and make it habitable?

I think that this freedom to be the maker of your own world instead of simply being the inhabitant of one that has already been made is a truly grand form of human freedom. We had that during the period from Plymouth Rock through the closing of the American frontier in the late 1890s. There's a famous quote from a great historian, Walter Prescott Webb, that says "People will miss the frontier more than words can ever express. For hundreds of years they heard its call and bet their lives and fortune on its outcome." This is why we still look back today at the time of the American frontier as a great time, despite the fact that it was filled with all kinds of harsh experiences and heartbreak.

So with Mars, there will be grand successes and there will be heartbreak. Not everyone will strike it rich, but everyone will get a chance for a new start. There's a reason why millions of people in the Old World sold everything they had to get a ticket on a ship to get them to America. And for some of them it didn't work out so well. But it did for enough of them that they're still coming today.

In your keynote address at the Mars Society annual convention in August, you said: "The space program needs to be doing what it was doing in the 1960s, which was breaking unprecedented boundaries." Why do you think Americans, generally speaking, have become uninspired by the U.S. space program?

Life on Mars:  Robert Murray

Because it has become uninspiring. Because it has not continued in the bold, heroic mode in which it began. In the 1960s, reaching for the moon meant just that. It was a metaphor for attempting the impossible, and we attempted it and we did it. And it inspired millions of people in every way. The number of science graduates in this country doubled in the 1960s at every level -- high school, college, PhD. But it also inspired us in many other ways, because it said nothing is impossible.

For us to say we can't go to Mars today is to basically say that we've become less than the people who got us to where we are today, and that's something that we can't afford. The risks associated with a human mission to Mars, given what we know today about Mars and about space technology, are much lower than the risks of the Apollo moon program were.

Page 1 of 2 12next ›last »
Want to read more articles on the military, aviation, and space? Subscribe to Popular Science and enter to win $5,000!

9 Comments

Mike Cook

from Kent, WA

To get to Mars first we have to get to Phobos as fast as possible as absolute speed lessens the human exposure to interstellar radiation, especially solar flares that are unpredictable when starting out on the journey. Also our consumption of consumables will be much less, meaning we don't have to take so much with us.

So, let's go fast. Instead of a leisurely 12 month or more journey from Earth to the vicinity of Mars that mostly involves coasting after an initial acceleration, let's accelerate the whole way, using every speed booster we can think of, from solar sail to ion engine. If we could cut the trip to three months one-way, we dramatically make the mission easier to manage. Some dangers would be increased, but many would be dramatically decreased by the shortening of transit time.

Then, when we near Phobos, let's use it as our emergency brake--i.e. a large mass that we reach out and grab or snag to slow ourselves down. Some type of pre-positioned structure would greatly aid in this. In a patent (pending) I have suggested a simple lasso of high tech carbon fiber, but other ideas have been suggested that might work as well, including elaborate tight beam projectors to slow an approaching spacecraft.

The important thing is that speed is wonderful. Also acceleration, because human beings really like the feeling of gravity. It is good for us. Once we get down to the surface of Mars we will experience a little gravity, but it would still be a good idea to exercise every day in a full 1-g centrifuge.

I dream of going to/living on/recreating on Mars. This is a life long dream that I certainly hope will soon be a reality. Thank you POPSCI for this interesting and great article. For more on Mars recreation see www.ootwo.com and go to any of the Mars pages, I think there are 3 or four. Plus in the blog section there are some fun articles as well.

I just read this book (found it on the shelf at Borders yesterday, despite the release date cited) - it's hard to describe since it's actually serious on several levels (sci-tech, social-political, philosophical even) but just a hoot all around. HIGHLY recommended.

Mr. Cook I have to say your plan is pretty far-fetched. Number one, carrying fuel for constant ignition would be stupidly heavy, and would never even get off the ground just from the shear weight of it. Also, Phobos is a horribly irregularly shaped moon, and is more of a large asteroid than a moon, and hooking some lasso catcher's mitt to it is pretty out there. Let's say we could ship out some robots to phobos that could hook it up. Let's even say that it works, and that it could catch a spacecraft, that has been constantly accelerating in a frictionless environment for three months, the force behind this craft would be so immense, one of three things would happen:

1. the tension on the high tech rubber band would snap, flinging the spacecraft and crew off at a completely unpredictable trajectory, pretty much ensuring their death.

2. the band would hold, but the elasticity of it after extreme tension would just hurl it back the way it came, ensuring their death as well.

3. the band would hold, but the G forces behind so much acceleration would smash the craft like a soda can with a sledgehammer.

Not to mention how small phobos really is, at only 22.2km in diameter (a 15 minute drive) such a tug from something traveling so fast would throw off ITS trajectory as well, potentially causing the moon's destruction into Mars or just really screwing with its orbit, which is something its handling just fine on its own. We're already destroying most of our planet, i don't want to start solar system exploration with such irresponsibility as well.

I believe we should take small steps first. Colonizing Mars would be a very ambitious project indeed. I believe that we should try to colonize the moon first, then from there if everything turns out well we could turn to colonizing Mars or one of its moons Deimos or Phobos.

I know that it would be difficult for us to colonize the Moon but we have to start there first and there will be mistakes because we do not know every scenario that might take place even though we try to anticipate everything but there are some things that might be overlooked then once we have encountered them, then we might have a better understanding of how to colonize Mars. Besides, it would take a lot of resources like fuel for the trip to Mars - and the Moon is relatively nearer to us.

Maybe build something like a biosphere in the Moon first or make it habitable and then Mars...

Mr. Cook must be talking of a future when we'll have
a reusable Endeavour with an ion engine that half way to Mars does a 180 spin to reduce its speed. I was thinking that by having such ship we could use it to play billiards with comets and meteorites by using nukes to bombard Mars
to accelerate its terraforming, I saw something like
this in the Discovery channel. Well, I was wondering what would happen to Mars after colliding with something big and filled with water like Europa the moon of Jupiter, would it become more like the earth?

Mike Cook

from Kent, WA

Hi Brpagel: Thanks for the technical analysis--which forces my brain up to speed after a dull shift at the day job. I didn't say anything about taking chemical fuel to burn on a constant acceleration to Mars. I said ion engine, which gives about double the fuel mileage. Also, the faster you go, the smaller you can make the spaceship, because you need to carry along fewer supplies.

Perhaps the best solution would be a focused beam propulsion system. Others have proposed building the base station on our Luna with a huge nuclear power plant, which would basically project a tight but humungous amount of laser energy at a heat shield/mirror on the departing end of the spaceship. This would give a constant push. If enough power is available to provide even a .5 g acceleration that would soon amount to a very high velocity. Then another beam projector on Phobos begins a .5 deceleration of the spaceship. The final step will be actually putting out high tensile strength ropes which would stretch to aid deceleration, with strain gauges monitoring to let out more cable if necessary to prevent snapping. Then you winch the spaceship in to Phobos (or the moon of any planet to which you may want to go at a high rate of speed.)

The fate of Phobos ultimately is to fall into Mars anyhow, as other Mars moons have done. Our techniques will actually delay that because we are adding energy to Phobos, not taking it away. Over repeated launches and recoveries of spacecraft we can calculate things so as to prevent the orbit of Phobos from becoming too eccentric.

Hello Mr. Mike Cook, you're proposing that the ship would travel at 5 Gs for it to reach its destination of Phobos early.

But, how long will that 5 G acceleration be? Coz if it would be months I don't think that humans could withstand that amount of Gs for a very long time. Or could they, I'm thinking that maybe they have to decelerate or stop everytime they have to eat, sleep or eat, am I right?

Besides the focused light beam propulsion that you've proposed... is there something like that in existence right now. And if so, wouldn't there be attenuation of the amplified power due to the distance involved? Sorry am grasping at straws here coz am not knowledgable about propulsion systems and other stuff. But, are my ideas valid or not?

Having read Robert Zubrin's "The Case for Mars" and "Entering Space", I was deeply impressed with his no-nonsense approach to getting a human presence on Mars as simply, cheaply and safely as possible. He emphasises the goal of Martian settlement as an extension of the human imperative to expand our territory and continue to push back our frontiers.

I couldn't agree more, but one thing I don't remember him mentioning is this: When we have another large impactor like the Chixalub meteor that ended the dinosaurs' reign, our fragile species will be extinguished if we have all our eggs in this one planetary basket.
Mars is our best local candidate for a backup. If we have a self-sustaining and genetically diverse community established when he Big One hits Earth, we can re-seed Mama or simply continue outward, carrying the essence and accumulated knowledge of humanity. Life will continue in the cracks and crevices of Earth, but not our life.
Thus shall the meek truly inherit the Earth.
I only hope that President Obama can see the wisdom in making Mars Direct happen before the end of his term.



Download Our iPhone App

Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone with full articles, images and offline viewing



Grab the Tech Buyer's Guide iPhone App

Carry everything you need to make a smart buy on HDTVs, cameras and 14 other product categories right in your pocket



Follow Us On Twitter

Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed



Become a Fan On Facebook

Share links with friends, comment on stories and more


February 2010: Renovating America

Innovative fixes for five of the country's biggest infrastructure messes, plus a look the quest to read the human mind, the LCD screen that might finally kill paper dead, and the world's scariest science.

Read the issue here.

Popular Science Photo Pool


Share your photos in the Pop Sci pool at www.flickr.com!