Why It's So Hard to Land on Mars

Подписаться 1,4 млн

Просмотров 194 тыс.

50% 1

We’ve sent more spacecraft to Mars than any other planet, but around half of the probes that have ever attempted to explore Mars have either crashed or disappeared.
The first 200 to sign up at brilliant.org/scishowspace/ will get 20% off their annual Premium subscription.
Hosted by: Reid Reimers
SciShow has a spinoff podcast! It's called SciShow Tangents. Check it out at www.scishowtangents.org
----------
Support SciShow by becoming a patron on Patreon: / scishow
----------
Dooblydoo thanks go to the following Patreon supporters:
Alex Hackman, Andrew Finley Brenan, Lazarus G, Sam Lutfi, D.A. Noe, الخليفي سلطان, Piya Shedden, KatieMarie Magnone, Scott Satovsky Jr, Charles Southerland, Patrick D. Ashmore, charles george, Kevin Bealer, Chris Peters
----------
Like SciShow? Want to help support us, and also get things to put on your walls, cover your torso and hold your liquids? Check out our awesome products over at DFTBA Records: dftba.com/scishow
----------
Looking for SciShow elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook: / scishow
Twitter: / scishow
Tumblr: / scishow
Instagram: / thescishow
----------
Sources:
www.space.com/25497-how-mars-...
mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/missio...
• 7 Minutes of Terror: T...
newscenter.lbl.gov/2017/02/22/...
www.planetary.org/blogs/emily-...
mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/missio...
phys.org/news/2018-03-success...
mars.nasa.gov/mer/mission/spa...
mars.nasa.gov/mer/mission/spa...
ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...
www.space.com/16777-curiosity...
mars.nasa.gov/programmissions...
blogs.scientificamerican.com/...
www.nasa.gov/pdf/737628main_F...
Images:
svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/13016
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NA...
images.nasa.gov/details-GRC-2...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ma...
photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/cat...
svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/12962
www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/ma...
• Mars Pathfinder - 20th...
• Mars Science Laborator...
mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/multim...
svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/13016

Опубликовано:

17 дек 2018

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 408

@scishowspace 5 лет назад

The first 200 to sign up at brilliant.org/scishowspace/ will get 20% off their annual Premium subscription.

@osmosisjones4912 5 лет назад

the reason the . E.M drive Didn't work because a body at rest stays at rest. to move the Valumm dentistry requires Thrust . but to push mass would Use vibration energy waves in pasific direction. ruducing Counter force of wait reducing Fual required . with conventional rockets

@user-qc4kg1gz6b 5 лет назад

@@osmosisjones4912 When did the first planets form after the birth of the universe?

@fattyboombalatty6095 5 лет назад

Will you add an annotation around 0:42 mentioning the Venera probe? I like the content but feel like you should make attempts to fix any inaccuracies in the videos.

@akasteveps5805 5 лет назад

extremely difficult to land on something that only excists in cgi world

@sjcwoor 5 лет назад

The exclamation mark after 45 implies that there were 119622220865480194561963161495657715064383733760000000000 missions

@simpleman6352 5 лет назад

Landing on Mars is a 2 step program : 1. Find Mars. 2. Land on the damn thing.

@sophiewilliams7582 5 лет назад

Haha! We need more "can-do" folks like you in the space program!

@bpark10001 5 лет назад

You fail to mention two of the most challenging parts: 1, having enough "delta-V" to get the craft there (which means "insane quantities of fuel"), and 2, doing the navigation sufficient accuracy to take advantage of atmospheric drag (not too much and burn up, not too little and fail to achieve mars orbit capture). All of this is to reduce problem #1, fuel. So serious is the latter that there have been plans to set up a "GPS" system on mars.

@coraini666 Год назад

Felow KSPer, I salute thee.

@bjarnes.4423 5 лет назад

0:42 VENUS!

@danieljensen2626 5 лет назад

I was gonna argue, but nope, turns out you are right. The soviets successfully landed on Venus first, and they also beat the US to Mars. I guess the statement in the video is correct if "we" refers to NASA specifically and but humanity in general.

@TomRizzuto 5 лет назад

It's not really friction with the Earth's atmosphere which burns up satellites upon reentry, most of the heat caused by reentry is due to the the compression of air into shock waves.

@coukraftergembli7142 5 лет назад

0:42 What about Venera 7 (Venus lander)?

@tetsi0815 5 лет назад

It' a US show... Soviets can't be included in "we" ;-)

@NilsNone 5 лет назад

They didn't need parachutes because Venus atmosphere is pretty T H I C C.

@NilsNone 5 лет назад

Duh. missed your timestamp!

@hperantunes 5 лет назад

@Peter Connell Indeed, the word venereal comes from the name of the goddess of beauty. :)

@marcinambrozy6756 5 лет назад

Also Venera 8, 9 and 10 landed before Viking 1

@limiv5272 5 лет назад

You forgot to mention an obvious additional problem of landing on Mars vs the moon: gravity!

@jblob5764 5 лет назад

Scishow space and scishow in the same day!! Winning at life 😎

@TheTexas1994 5 лет назад

I always enjoy listening to Reid’s speaking voice

@Aaano 5 лет назад

I didn't realize we've done 1.1962222e+56 missions so far... How haven't we sent a manned mission yet?!

@m6jin 3 года назад

They won't understand 😅

@marallenrondez2606 3 года назад

Nice joke

@CL-go2ji 11 месяцев назад

Correct: I don´t understand. @@m6jin

@Geekosification 5 лет назад

great episode.

@amedicabg 5 лет назад

Basically: atmosphere not T H I C C enough

@marcusnielsen1632 5 лет назад

Did you just assume the thickness of Mars' atmosphere? xD

@legogaming4017 5 лет назад

dragozal Thick*

@hperantunes 5 лет назад

@@legogaming4017 The 丅卄工匚匚 thing is a meme.

@amedicabg 5 лет назад

LEGO Gaming Nothing gets past you, eh, chief?

@legogaming4017 5 лет назад

Hilton I know it is, but I don’t find it funny.

@zhubajie6940 5 лет назад

Closest approaches to Mars vary greatly but in 2003 it came within 3 minutes and 6 seconds at the speed of light (not 8 as quoted) though admittedly that was the closest in almost 60,000 years. Communication time minimums (at closest approach) averages around four and a half minutes.

@lusewa4939 5 лет назад

i love your content

@SgtSupaman 5 лет назад

I'm pretty sure the main reason we've done more missions to Mars is because it is our neighbor. (And we pick it over Venus because it is easier to work on Mars' surface.)

@kingjames4886 5 лет назад

I hear the next generation of mars rovers will be packed in what is essentially a giant version of one of those floppy snakes from the 90s.

@pikminlord343 5 лет назад

great to see

@EarlDerrickReal 5 лет назад

His voice sounds more appropriate for an Unsolved Mysteries type of video LOL

@fadlya.rahman4113 5 лет назад

Maybe we can create an extremely thin and light yet very strong fabric to make a large parachute that can open large enough to slow down the spacecraft in a thin martian atmosphere with minimal retroburn, but can be folded and stowed in a very small compartment.

@Th3Nigma 5 лет назад

If you had a degree in Aerospace Engineering, I am 100% confident that you could help design and build it.

@rubyhoney6177 5 лет назад

MAN WILL GO TO THE MOON WHEN STANLEY KUBRICK RETURNS FROM THE DEAD TO SHOOT THE MOVIE

@nickvinsable3798 5 лет назад

Remember how those probe droids landed on Hoth in “Star Wars: Empire Strikes Back”? Wonder if we’re going to do that.

@Phoboskomboa 5 лет назад

Landing on mars is like trying to stop your car from highway speeds on a 2 car length long patch of wet ice.

@Flint404 5 лет назад

Let's not forget how NASA failed a multi-hundred million dollars Mars mission because they used the imperial units system and even after that it took them 8 years to finally go metric.

@CL-go2ji 11 месяцев назад

Wait, wasn´t MOST of NASA metric long before? And: yeah, that gets a prize!!! How could people not think of metric units existing?

@Aeturnalis 3 года назад

You said that before Mars, we only landed spacecraft on the Earth and the Moon, but that is untrue. Venus was the first planet visited by Earth spacecraft, in 1970 with the Soviet Venera 7 Lander. The first landing on Mars was in 1971 with the Soviet Mars 3 lander.

@stevesmith1383 3 года назад

maybe the "we" he refers to is "we Americans", and not "we humans" but you are right though

@austingarrison9956 5 лет назад

First, I love you guys. You make me love science and space even more than I already do, so thank you. Oh yeah and I’m First.

@Samien 5 лет назад

Why is it so hard for SciShow to make a Hale Bopp video 😂❤️❤️😘

@Ging_10 5 лет назад

Just the fact that scientists and engineers could design a machine that can land automatically on 230+million km distant planet is just astonishing to say the least!

@DragoniteSpam 5 лет назад

The more I learn about space travel the more amazed I am that we've actually figured out how to do it

@Th3Nigma 5 лет назад

And there's much more coming. Check out New Glenn, Starship, Falcon Heavy, etc. When people talk about a Second Space Race, they are not overstating it.

@DragoniteSpam 5 лет назад

Exciting times, isn't it?

@lejink 5 лет назад

We need to send more missions to Uranus For the funny comments and headlines Totally worth the several billion dollars of development

@jerry3790 5 лет назад

I like to imagine mars is red from the blood of all the landers that died.

@h.plovecat4307 5 лет назад

Rust for the Rust God.

@Xirpzy 5 лет назад

Isnt oxygen needed to get rust?

@prernag 5 лет назад

Dark

@user-qc4kg1gz6b 5 лет назад

@@user-ou1sn9il2d I have questions about string theory the question is Do tendons create particles of energy Or the tendons will turn into particles ??

@user-ou1sn9il2d 5 лет назад

@@user-qc4kg1gz6b Your comment is kinda off to the topic but if you want answer to your question then sure. Maybe the tendon youre referring to is the "string" from the string theory? But I will assume that it is. The main idea of the string in string theory is that the string vibrates and that vibration of string represent a certain particle (ex. bosons, leptons, etc.) It is a representation basically of a particle in a quantum basis.

@A3Kr0n 5 лет назад

I thought ablative heat shields were used way back on the first space capsules?

@blackhatfreak 5 лет назад

He's talking about the ones used for Mars mission.

@jamesmnguyen 5 лет назад

@@blackhatfreak Ya, but Scishow made the mistake of saying invented.

@BaronVonQuiply 5 лет назад

00:22 Hm, turns out Kerbal's Early Access was dead-on accurate.

@NewMessage 5 лет назад

Not so much a landing as a controlled crash... like my Dad parking.

@TheCimbrianBull 5 лет назад

ROFL! 🤣 😂 😅

@kevintan5497 5 лет назад

every succesful landing is a controlled crash

@elfarlaur 5 лет назад

Mars 2020, a different red wave

@danielbickford3458 5 лет назад

Could it be that is 250 to 1250 light second away has anything to do with it?

@notarobot459 5 лет назад

Yes mars has a solid hard surface to land on

@Belnivek 5 лет назад

Is there a list of probes (space, moon, mars, other) that have been lost and later found?

@Cythil 5 лет назад

well, if you do not want it to melt you can make it out of Tungsten... Of course is also one of the most dense elements out there so it would not be a light craft... so maybe not the best option

@dynamicworlds1 5 лет назад

Don't think we can make all the components out of tungsten. Computers, sensors, etc are rather pickey about materials.

@Platyfurmany 5 лет назад

Of course, another challenge not mentioned is that everyone involved in plotting the navigation, especially the orbital insertion, use the same units of measure... such as in the case of the Mars Climate Orbiter of 1998.

@CL-go2ji 11 месяцев назад

🙁☹☹

@iNuchalHead 5 лет назад

0:56 is ram compression just not a thing?

@paulperkins1615 5 лет назад

What makes the Moon easier than Mars to land on is that it is smaller and therefore has much less gravity. It also probably hurts the Mars landing reliability statistics that spacecraft are a lot older by the time they get to Mars. The Martian atmosphere is actually helpful in that using atmospheric friction to slow down, though not trivially easy, can actually be done with a lot less mass than it would take to do all the braking with retro-rockets. The thinness of the Martian atmosphere does mean that parachutes alone can't make a very soft landing, and also makes it hard to test designs for Martian parachutes on Earth. And yes, you make it look like you don't think the rest of the Earth (besides the USA) is actually real by forgetting about the Venera landings.

@blackdougy3247 5 лет назад

he got the radio signals mixed up with the sun from its closest distance communication between earth and mars would take anywhere from 3 to 3 and a half minutes

@bagochips1208 5 лет назад

What if the sky crane itself packed some instruments and landed instead of crash? It'd be more use, like maybe seismometer or other basic equipments, like inSight 2 with less complexity. Just saying, because all this extra mass and machinery just goes to waste by crashing is a bit wasteful... ya know.

@lizerdspherex 5 лет назад

They should take a page from Japan's Super Robot shows and build a massive rover that's made of 3 smaller rovers that GATTAI.

@marcmcsweeney7725 5 лет назад

WHY DONT THEY TRY LAND A GUIDANCE SYSTEM ON MARS TO HELP WITH ALL OTHER LANDINGS......

@Th3Nigma 5 лет назад

That's a great idea. Thus far the most prohibitive thing about Mars and space has not been the physics or engineering of the task, the problem has been resources and cost. SpaceX and Blue Origin, through reusability, promise to bring the cost of getting things to Mars orders of magnitude lower. One of the things we could theoretically send to Mars would indeed be some kind of radar or lidar guidance system. I'm sure that if you had a degree in Aerospace or Systems Engineering, you could help us build it.

@avi12 5 лет назад

2:17 I love how he says "And probably a good amount of coffee"

@1stupidfatginger 5 лет назад

I LOVE ME SOME YUMMY SPACE SCIENCE!!!

@firstcynic92 5 лет назад

1:20 Thanks for encapsulating the main reason not to colonize Mars.

@Th3Nigma 5 лет назад

It is just another challenge to overcome.

@paulgo2717 5 лет назад

Compression, not friction, causes the heat.

@PorchPotatoMike 5 лет назад

It’s a common misconception. I expected SciShow to do better.

@Nygaard2 5 лет назад

It’s also friction - and besides, the drag is part of why it’s easier to land on earth... So, no, they’re not wrong.

@peewee130946 5 лет назад

It’s friction as well

@EclipseClemens 5 лет назад

While the friction does indeed produce a lot of heat, compressing atmosphere in front of a re-entering craft traveling 16 kilometers a second. Squeeze all the air within 8km to both your left and right together in a second and -who'da thunk it- it thermally dwarves the fricative heating effects completely.

@Nygaard2 5 лет назад

...I feel I should let this go... but... Rapidly compressed air produces heat because of... friction between air molecules... so, sure, it's not the rubber-against-the-tarmac type of friction - but it's not a wrong word to use.

@user-fj4mb5jh8o 5 лет назад

Ablative heat shields were around long before the 70s...

@user-fj4mb5jh8o 5 лет назад

Otherwise, great video

@markholm7050 5 лет назад

Yes. Ablative heat shields were developed for missile warhead reentry vehicles and spy satellite film return capsules and that research was extended to manned spacecraft and then to unmanned civilian scientific spacecraft.

@harrygreenaway8003 5 лет назад

I would say the likelihood of there being even the smallest amount of life on mars is highly likey

@Th3Nigma 5 лет назад

Especially if we have already managed to locate liquid water on Mars (which we have). If Mars turns out to be a bust, the price of spaceflight is getting cost-effective enough that places like Europa, Enceladus, Titan become alternatives where life is also possible. spacenews.com/europa-or-enceladus-if-nasa-switches-from-sls-to-falcon-heavy-it-wont-have-to-choose/ If you believe finding proof of life on other celestial bodies is a worthy endeavour, help us by spreading the word about how SpaceX and Blue Origin are bringing down the cost of spaceflight.

@gregcampwriter 5 лет назад

The Venera 7 probe landed on Venus in 1970, six years before the Viking landings on Mars.

@DreamskyDance 5 лет назад

Hmm.. interesting question comes to mind. Would spaceX-s rockets, mainly planned BFR but i am interested about falcon 9 as well, have more difficulty landing on mars than on earth. I mean there is not so much atmospheric friction on mars so if rocket can whitstand earths atmosphere it can mars's for sure... but on the other hand.. how to brake ? If you sent a ship from earth at very high speeds and this is not a rover that can be wrapped in airbags or slowed down with parachute and it seems that rocket does not have enough convinient surface for aerobraking..so how ? By using main engine you would have to apply as much power to slowing down as you did for speeding up back at earth and thats no joke speed and it takes fuel to slow down. Is there consistent idea or opinion on that or are they still developing ideas and solutions for that that have to be practically proven ?

@Logan11thMEU 5 лет назад

I hope that the first ever human sets its foot on Mars during my lifetime so I will be able to see it

@Th3Nigma 5 лет назад

You will, and relatively soon. But if we want to truly see it happen, we all have to work together to spread the word. www.marssociety.org/r-zubrin-op-ed-purpose-driven-space-program/

@Aeturnalis 3 года назад

Depending on your age, you will probably be alive to see it. NASA, CNSA, ESA, and ROSCOSMOS all have plans to land humans on Mars in the 2030s and 2040s. Honestly, it could be done this decade if all the major space programs worked together for it.

@eyeln9ne696 5 лет назад

I NEVER get tired of learning about space!

@MsMouthy 5 лет назад

Something’s taking the crafts

@shanukatolkar4493 5 лет назад

Far ahead of all this in KerbalSpaceProgram. Too bad it does not have airbags.

@alexsiemers7898 5 лет назад

And Duna’s atmosphere is almost 7x denser than Mars’

@MonkeyspankO 5 лет назад

Couldn't we use more massive parachutes? I don't know the exact math, but something on the order of parachutes like massive gliders hundreds of feet wide. Could be deployed outward with some kind of mini rockets. just a thought

@thomaswijgerse723 5 лет назад

well, the size of the parachute would have to increase exponentially when the mass increases. It just doesnt scale very well as things get larger.

@jamesmnguyen 5 лет назад

I think there's a video explaining why InSight's parachute isn't larger. Or some video by NASA...

@Th3Nigma 5 лет назад

@@thomaswijgerse723 Correct, and as the size of the chute increase exponentially, so too does the chance of the chute tearing and causing a catastrophic loss of vehicle.

@mirakuruboy474 5 лет назад

Deja vu?

@TheTvcompu 5 лет назад

I feel like I already watched this video before

@Randompie3456 5 лет назад

minutephysics did a video on this too a while back

@osmosisjones4912 5 лет назад

one way to protect a ship from Radiation is it's own Radiation. electric Field around the outside . and tiny Slit from back to front. reflecting electrons out ward. charge back to tip of front and Release it around & behind. for more propelion

@Dragrath1 5 лет назад

Radiation is really a separate issue related to getting somewhere outside the Earth's magnetosphere. Scientists are working on generating a magnetic field but there are challenges with the approach namely the cost to sustain said field. There are people looking to find workarounds but it isn't so simple as the risk depends on what the polarity of a solar storm and or cosmic ray is, get it wrong and you might actually make things worse

@phesterful 5 лет назад

@@Dragrath1 Not to mention it would be rather hard to block gamma rays or neutrons with a magnetic field. They're not the major constituents, but they're still there.

@Gkitchens1 5 лет назад

hella good radiation suit and an oxygen tank. You're welcome nasa

@juniormynos9457 5 лет назад

How about a craft that deploys wings at a specific altitude designed to allow a descent similar to that of a paper airplane?

@alexsiemers7898 5 лет назад

You’d need massive wings to generate any decent lift on mars.

@juniormynos9457 5 лет назад

@@alexsiemers7898 Not at the speeds the craft enters the atmosphere

@CL-go2ji 11 месяцев назад

... I doubt a paper airplane would glide at Mars pressures ...

@smolsnek14 5 лет назад

Next do "Why is it so hard to land - a date"

@Dunkle0steus 5 лет назад

I hope you didn't just say that friction causes things to burn up in Earth's atmosphere. It's absolutely not friction, it's the gas being compressed in front of the object. When you travel significantly faster than the speed of sound, gas can't get out of the way and just gets compressed instead. When you reduce a gas's volume, it heats up significantly.

@EagleTalonSystems 5 лет назад

Looking good man, been hitting the gym?

@thomas.02 5 лет назад

Technically you don't need to know what orbits put your spacecraft into the planet's orbit to design landing mechanisms.... :d

@werwolfking2000 5 лет назад

much faster than the method on the video!

@cinemaclips4497 3 года назад

The Soviet Mars 3 was the first to land on Mars on December 2nd 1971.

@Vizal 5 лет назад

Am I the only one who has crush on Reid?

@OneBentMonkey 5 лет назад

Vizal No, you are not the only one.

@General12th 5 лет назад

Friction isn't responsible for reentry burn. Air compression is.

@brokenacoustic 5 лет назад

Still think we should be investing our resources into getting a base setup on the moon first.

@Ignacio.Romero 5 лет назад

Moon base and Mars mission will happen kind of simultaneously

@peter4210 5 лет назад

@@Ignacio.Romero as long as its not that shitty moon gateway station/outpost Idea, That is just a was of time and money and has almost no benefits. A moonbase should just be a colony like a mars base, if im not mistake, it is actualy easier to make fuel on mars then on the moon, but anyway with the BFR, we wont need a fuel production on the moon to refuel ships going back

@Ignacio.Romero 5 лет назад

@@peter4210 A moon gateway station is not a bad idea since a manned mars mission would need to refuel, and it's much easier to escape a moon orbit than from the moon's surface or an Earth orbit

@animistchannel2983 5 лет назад

Yes. You use the moon base to pull minerals and fuel for powered-landing ships that can ferry back and forth to mars, then you don't have to deal with earth's gravity well. A full BFR-class ship fueled from the moon area can go to mars, do a powered land & takeoff (or drop off powered-land modules and act as a mother-ship), and come back to the moon on the same tank. Or you can pop out to the asteroids for resources. What you won't need after a little of that? -- Anything from earth. That's when you start building the really big spacecraft, like kilometers long, and you don't have to ask earth for permission. It's all about getting to make those O'Neill cylinders. Also, check out "Isaac Arthur" channel for lots of possibilities.

@peter4210 5 лет назад

I dont remember the source, but The gateway station would waste more fuel and time going to it, then it would give a boost to any flight, Refueling in orbit of earth is still much better. The whole Moon gateway station was this whole idea NASA had wet dreams about like their multiple shitty projects then end up to be crap in the end

@christelheadington1136 5 лет назад

Chem trails over Mars.See! those warning, that it was alien space craft,on the Martian Wide Web.weren't crazy after all.

@smurfyday 5 лет назад

Your crazy space here and no space there shows a difficulty grasping basic grammar. Wouldn't bet too much on science.

@jeffmccallum9059 5 лет назад

🌑👍

@evaristegalois6282 5 лет назад

SciShow Space: *"It's hard to land on Mars"* Elon Musk: *"Hold my beer"*

@cyrilio 5 лет назад

Evariste Galois more like “hold my weed”. /s Lol

@flylikealbatross7441 5 лет назад

Lets see how his employees do that. SpaceX never landed on mars and several spacecrafts for NASA by Lockheed or Northop will land before SpaceX will.

@mondianijoli9080 5 лет назад

@@flylikealbatross7441 Let's see if Space X can borrow enough money to keep afloat for one more year. Let alone build or send a rocket to Mars

@thomaswijgerse723 5 лет назад

@@mondianijoli9080 you realise it has the largest market share out of any launch service provider? theyre doing well enough.

@animistchannel2983 5 лет назад

Every movement needs a poster-child. For the next generation of geeks, trekkies, gamers, engineers, and futurists who actually WANT to be a spacefaring civilization and think it's worth putting society's resources to evolving that quickly, Elon is that symbol. He has described the start of SpaceX: "I had to be the lead engineer at first, because no one good would join." 10 years later, he has no problem signing up lots of the best people who share that vision. Oh, and go check out "Isaac Arthur" channel, aka SFIA. Lots of people there share the vision as well, and far beyond.

@Thehoneybadger90 4 года назад

How would a mission to Mars with people would leave the planet?, I mean is it possible to land and the leave to earth again?, Or is it a one way mission?

@AutisticThinker 5 лет назад

mmm, Orbital mechanics. :)

@wendten2 5 лет назад

I really cant understand the mars hype? it is all about prestige, a much smarter priority would be to establish a permanent self sufficient moon colony before anything else.

@Th3Nigma 5 лет назад

The Mars hype exists because there is strong evidence suggesting that terraforming of Mars is possible. There is millions of tons of CO2 that is sequestered in Mars' soil and ice caps that can be used to trigger a runaway greenhouse effect (the good kind, since Mars is incredibly cold and has an incredibly thin atmosphere.) arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/6.1993-2005 This is Dr. Robert Zubrin and Dr. Chris McCay's white paper on the possibilities of terraforming. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-O5k0MtlWPOs.html The Mars hype also exists because it is a nonviolent way of putting mankind's best minds to work discovering the secrets of our universe, which 100% have applications in science that you and I could see in our daily lives. Imagine if instead of an engineer building the next generation of ICBM, there were a company paying him to develop space transport technology the likes of which we haven't seen before (Falcon Heavy).

@wendten2 5 лет назад

@@Th3Nigma that is something way beyond our current capabilities. A moonbase however could be established within 5 years

@nafrost2787 5 лет назад

I thnk the hype comes from the fact that the public and goverments are much more intrested in mars than the moon. But I agree, the moon can also be used as a launch point for a mars mission

@dynaa4168 5 лет назад

Moon colony?moon did not have atmosphere. We will be killed by meteors and asteroids so colonies are impossible there.

@wendten2 5 лет назад

@@dynaa4168 caves and domes.. since Mars have no magnetic field we need to shield us there as well...

@OverlordZephyros 5 лет назад

Much easier to colonize Venus than mars ... Lets try that. Venus with cloud cities would be amazing

@cadenorris4009 5 лет назад

Lord Zephyros Venus is the most uninhabitable planet in the solar system

@OverlordZephyros 5 лет назад

@@cadenorris4009 not at 50 km (31 mi) in the upper atmosphere where you would only need is our own air as a lifting gas for the aerostat habitats. Outside is very pleasant ( you would only need a breathing mask)

@OverlordZephyros 5 лет назад

@Ex Animus only at first, its actually more cost effective than mars because its closer to earth (less fuel) and you can harvest the atmosphere for all you need to survive (water and food)

@witchofengineering 5 лет назад

@@OverlordZephyros You just shouted "I have absolutely no knowledge 'about how space travel works'" To reach Low Earth Orbit rocket needs about 9400m/s of deltaV, depends of TWR and aerodynamics. Transfer burn from LEO to Mars costs aroud 3600m/s, while to Venus around 3500m/s. The difference is marginal. But you know, which difference is not marginal? Orbital speed around Venus is 7200m/s, while around Mars it's 3500m/s. So, even neglecting gravity and aerolosses, that are also much higher on Venus, you need much more fuel to launch to Venus' orbit than to Mars' orbit, than you save becouse "its closer to earth". Not to mention, that you also need much more fuel to go from Low Venus Orbit to Earth than to go from Low Mars Orbit to Earth, becouse Venus is so much heavier than Mars, that the marginal distance difference doesn't matter

@Dragrath1 5 лет назад

Yeah Long term colonization wise Venus is the only other planet that could support human life without undeveloped technologies such as artificial gravity. The main worry I have with Venusian Cloud cities is that the same altitudes that would be best for cloud cities are also the same altitudes where possible biosignatures have been observed, so were we to set up a colony we would also by necessity be contaminating any possible Venusian life. Would be a shame to waste one of the few possible safe havens for life recklessly.

@adamroach4538 5 лет назад

Does it always take 8 minutes? Sometimes it doesn't take that long from what I've heard because of the positions of the planets.

@adamroach4538 5 лет назад

@Paul Visschers Yeah i thought about that, but I've heard it to be 6 minutes... 7 minutes of terror... 8 minutes... i don't even know anymore.

@massimookissed1023 5 лет назад

"At least 8 minutes" 7.5 minutes at closest distance & 18 minutes at greatest.

@Dragrath1 5 лет назад

Well there is some variation depending on where Earth and Mars are in their orbits . A good rule of thumb is that it takes about 8 minutes for light to to travel from the sun to the Earth i.e. 1 AU . Mars is about 1.5 AU from the Sun so it can vary from around 2.5 AU to 0.5 AU for a very rough estimate of variation ranging from 4 minutes (8 minutes round trip) to 20 minutes(40 minutes round trip) so 8 minutes round trip communication is actually the minimum delay when Earth and Mars are at closest approach, the further apart the planets are the longer it takes up to a maximum of roughly 40 minutes if Earth and Mars are on opposite sides of the sun.

@massimookissed1023 5 лет назад

Well, I just crashed my spaceprobe :( Did the maths with Mars' orbit in km and Earth's in miles. I wonder how many cubits it is to Venus...

@phesterful 5 лет назад

The seven minutes of terror isn't based on Mars' location relative to Earth. It refers to the seven minutes between reentry burn and landing. The travel time for the information to get to Earth is the same for the beginning of the burn as the landing; it's the difference between the two that's seven minutes. I don't know if it's the case with Mars, but on Earth reentry there's a point when the craft is enveloped in plasma that radio can't penetrate. So the craft loses signal and you wait. If it comes back, the craft survived reentry. More of an issue with capsules than the shuttle, too, iirc. [not for this lander, though, it communicated with a satellite overhead throughout the landing sequence. I swear, I did watch the video of it.]

@jamesh1597531 5 лет назад

So what type of metal do they use them to stand 2000C hot 🔥 temperature whilst travelling through the atmosphere.

@MrDnB89 5 лет назад

they use ablative heat shields

@jamesh1597531 5 лет назад

@@MrDnB89 thanks. A

@michaelblacktree 5 лет назад

The ablative material used on spacecraft is usually some kind of composite or silicate. There are several different types in use.

@c.ladimore1237 5 лет назад

now go save matt damon before he blows up the only hope to go back in time to get to saturn!

@jokwonpope1561 5 лет назад

The abaltor allows the craft to taste the meat not the heat

@joelreuning-scherer3733 5 лет назад

What about InSight? Or did I just miss that?

@Th3Nigma 5 лет назад

InSight landed propulsively. It did also use a giant drogue chute.

@H4WK6969 5 лет назад

Speed of light is pretty slow huh

@SgtSupaman 5 лет назад

It's extremely fast. You're just underestimating how far away planets are from each other. 8 minute round trip to Mars is ridiculous (only 4 minutes one way). The fastest probe (36,000 mph or 58,000 kph) ever launched from Earth...didn't go to Mars, but, if it had gone straight to Mars, it would have taken almost 40 days. So the best we can do can't even get us there within a month of solid travel. By comparison, light would make that trip over fourteen thousand times when we would just make it once (but that isn't even considering the speed of the crafts that actually went to Mars, which would be slower).

@bobbyharper8710 5 лет назад

The guys that designed the first Mars landers retired. Then the crashes ensued.

@safir2241 5 лет назад

Scishow: “Mars is really hard to land on.” Elon Musk: “Hold my jet fuel”

@smurfyday 5 лет назад

Someone's in love with Elon Musk.

@safir2241 5 лет назад

smurfyday Of course I am! The guy has the best “Came from nothing” story. Remember Bieber Fever? Yeah apparently that’s illegal with Elon.

@Bananachick 5 лет назад

Safir SpaceX has never successfully landed anything on any body other than the Earth

@onlylonly888 5 лет назад

Safir if you ever have a chance to ask elon, he would say the same. Mars is really hard to land on. If it is easy, he would have already landed.

@safir2241 5 лет назад

Ah Liew Humans always find a way. We will prevail soon, & manage to make colonies! In my opinion making a big moon colony / base would make it stupid easy to land on other planets because of the low-gravity situation there.

@asifE66 5 лет назад

anchor is in indian outlook today.., 😂😂😂😂

@nemanume 5 лет назад

We have landed on Venus , why didn't you mention this as well ?

@TheJimtanker 5 лет назад

Just play Kerbal Space Program and try to land on Duna.

@suirahplanogemo3407 5 лет назад

Like just use Hyperedit lol

@h.plovecat4307 5 лет назад

Well somebody needs air breaks.

@smurfyday 5 лет назад

*brakes.

@beefcakeandgravy 5 лет назад

@@smurfyday LOL So close, _and yet so far_

@reptilexcq2 4 года назад

You're not supposed to land on Mars, you're supposed to teleport there. Man are stupid they thought that the existence of an object must exist in space but failed to understand that space itself is the properties of the object.

@einsjam 5 лет назад

Reid Reimer should do commentary in WWE.

@Trag-zj2yo 5 лет назад

So we're spending all this effort and money to find out humans can't live on Mars or even survive the trip. Maybe we should clean up this mess first.

@CL-go2ji 11 месяцев назад

Not mutually exclusive. (Note: people think of space programs as "expensive", but e.g. NASA´s budget is far less than one cent out of a federal spending dollar. No serious Earth problems are going to get solved with that little money.)

@IamTheHolypumpkin 5 лет назад

0:47 Didn't we land on Venus before we land on Mars? We landed on Mars for the first time on On 2 December 1971 While we got to Venus about one year earlier on December 15, 1970.

@blackhatfreak 5 лет назад

That was the Russians

@SgtSupaman 5 лет назад

@@blackhatfreak, I'm guessing P45C4L S was using "we" to refer to humans, not a specific country.

@IamTheHolypumpkin 5 лет назад

@@blackhatfreak I know it the soviet union landed on Mars and Venus before the USA in the laer case the USA never landed on Venus, but I thought SciShow ment with we; Mankind in general not just the USA. Space Flight history has much more than just the USA.