This magazine is dedicated to discussions on scientific discoveries, research, and theories across various fields, including physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, and more. Whether you are a scientist, a science enthusiast, or simply curious about the world around us, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on a wide range of scientific topics. From the latest breakthroughs to historical discoveries and ongoing research, this category covers a wide range of topics related to science.
We still have a lot to learn of the psychology of the situation. Results from these studies are always interesting. Even if it is far from the real thing.
It is also a perfect starting point for a post apocalyptic novel. "The only group to survive the end was a small band of researchers, stuck in their isolation experiment."
I wonder what specifically they're interested in vs long deployments in Antarctica (people do 12 months rotations in some stations there).
I found this article discussing the psychology of placements in Australian antarctic stations: https://psychology.org.au/for-members/publications/inpsych/2021/february-march-issue-1/life-in-the-australian-antarctic-program.
The differences as I see them are:
those doing a antartic winter may as well have the no suited outdoor time, poor clothing choice will be death almost as quick
I'm thinking a lot of the equipment is different as well, and since they mention simulating equipment malfunctions, that plays an important part, especially with the additional limitations/simulated dangers.
Antarctica trips have all of those limits you mentioned, they'll just be worse for Mars. While they can operate sort of freely for a few months, once winter sets in, they are just as isolated as another planet. They just get the advantage of easier setup then Mars.
They did a similar thing before. Not sure if this would be super cool to do, or super boring.
I think there are easier ways to reduce your screen time.
Do we actually intend to send humans to Mars in any reasonable timeframe?
I guess that depends on what you consider reasonable. I figure if they're starting with simulations such as this now, it's reasonable to expect an actual manned mission in maybe 20 years.
I thought they'd done simulations like this in the past though. I may have been thinking of the Mars Society ones rather than actual NASA though.
Hard to say - There's still a lot of hazards yet to be accounted for: a lot more radiation exposure, literal poison in the soil, severe weather, safe and affordable supply chain, etc.
I think the radiation exposure might be manageable though, as at least in theory you can shield the habitats.
The showstopper could be the low gravity - we haven't really done many experiments on low gravity, the Mars Gravity Biosatellite never got built. But if it turns out that Martian gravity is really damaging to human health and thus long-term habitation is not viable then I think we'd have to really rethink our human spaceflight goals as on a planet you don't even have the option to simulate gravity via the centrifugal force - so it could just be game over for Mars colonisation.
One of my favorite Twilight Zone episodes