interplanetarita


2021 Accelerating Martian and Lunar Science through SpaceX Starship Missions
http://surveygizmoresponseuploads.s3.amazonaws.com/fileuploads/623127/5489366/111-381503be1c5764e533d2e1e923e21477_HeldmannJenniferL.pdf


SpaceX details plan to build Mars Base Alpha with reusable Starship rockets
https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-starship-mars-base-alpha-construction-plan/

With the help of coauthors from NASA Ames, SETI, and half a dozen prestigious US universities and institutes, SpaceX has begun to answer exactly that question in a 2021 whitepaper [PDF] submitted for the National Academies’ next Planetary Science and Astrobiology Decadal Survey. While that survey alone could influence NASA as the agency prepares to outline its next decade of space science and determine the ultimate destination of tens of billions of federal dollars, the consequences of which could be immense, SpaceX also used the paper to describe its plans for early missions to Mars in unprecedented detail.

As has always been the plan, SpaceX will begin the process of constructing sustainable cities on Mars with a few (relatively) simple steps. Likely as soon as the mid-2020s, SpaceX will begin launching uncrewed Starships to Mars to both verify the system’s maturity and readiness and “deliver significant quantities of cargo to the surface in advance of human arrival.” Likely leaning on a wide range of robotics, those early missions will help SpaceX characterize local resources, stage supplies, test technologies for long-duration Martian surface ops, and begin developing infrastructure – with a propellant plant likely the most pressing need. None of that is surprising. However, there’s more.

According to the authors, which include several current and former SpaceX engineers, “current SpaceX mission planning [tasks those early uncrewed Starships with delivering] equipment for increased power production, water extraction, LOX/methane production, pre-prepared landing pads, radiation shielding, dust control equipment, exterior shelters for humans and equipment, [and more – all hardware needed to support the first human base.]”

Further, confirming what’s been assumed to be the plan for years, “humans will likely live on [Starships] for the first few years until additional habitats are constructed” and “the first wave of uncrewed Starships can also be relocated and/or repurposed as needed to support the humans on the surface,” serving as “valuable assets for storage, habitation, [scientific laboratories], and a source of refined metal structures and resources.” The paper also states that “SpaceX is aggressively developing Starship to…conduct initial test flights to Mars…as soon as 2022 [or 2024]” and even raises the possibility of SpaceX launching the first Starship(s) to Mars before the rocket’s first lunar mission but then launching a separate lunar mission and landing a different Starship on the Moon while the Marsbound ship or ships are still in transit.

...

SpaceX appears to intend to pack even the very first Mars-bound ships with supplies. But even if they don’t bring much, the first Martian immigrants – launched in batches of “10-20 people” alongside “100+ metric tons” (~220,000+ lb) of cargo – will reuse all surviving Starships as pre-emplaced habitats, storage tanks, and raw material feedstock. Early cargo will focus on power, water, and propellant production, as well as shelters, radiation shielding, and the construction of prepared landing pads

TADEAS: Super doména. ;)

Paul Maidowski - planetarni temata

https://twitter.com/_ppmv

(PDF) Planetary Futures, Planetary History | Zoltán Boldizsár Simon - Academia.edu
https://www.academia.edu/42626908/Planetary_Futures_Planetary_History

the notion of the Anthropocene (Crutzen and Stoermer 2000) started its career as an ESS effort to name the systemic collision of the human and the natural worlds by referring to anthropogenic changes in the Earth system as testified by stratigraphic evidence. Yet it quickly became clear that the social components of the Anthropocene may not be as profoundly addressed by ESS as by scholars of the human world. No wonder that Eva Lövbrand and her co-authors (2015) asked the question ‘Who speaks for the future of Earth?’ and argued for a more prominent role for social scientific knowledge in coping with planetary futures. A distribution of work may indeed yield important results, while there is an equally compelling extent to which the systemic entanglement of physical and social processes is actually no one’s expertise in the modern disciplinary distribution of knowledge, which demands a new knowledge regime yet to be developed (Simon 2020).

What does all this mean for historical understanding? The answer I attempt to sketch in this essay is that as the futures ahead gain a planetary character, our historical understanding cannot escape to be planetary too. For historical understanding is not merely a question of what to make out of the past. It is a question of what to make out of the past, the present, and the future as seen together. Or, to use the category of François Hartog (2015), it is a question of what to make out of our reigning ‘regime of historicity’, the current configuration of the relation of past, present, and future. Drawing on Hartog, Dipesh Chakrabarty (2019: 1) suggests that ‘planetary or Anthropocenic regime of historicity’ may be the term that best captures our current condition. In transferring Hartog’s notion from the framework of referring to inner relations of temporal dimensions (past, present, future) into the framework of referring to timescales (the history of the planet, of life on the planet, of the globe), Chakrabarty suggests that ESS has already begun to write a new kind of history in a planetary regime of historicity.

...

The best way to think about a planetary history is to conceive of it as response to facing manifold planetary futures, including not explicitly Anthropocene-related ones too (at least not in the ESS meaning of the term), such as the aforementioned colonization of other planets. While this arguably expands what we mean by planetary, the second qualification rather narrows the category by stating that linking the planetary with the new historical condition does not mean that the planetary is the new historical condition itself. It is rather one of the central conceptual tenets of a renewed historical understanding through which we understand the world and ourselves historically in times of unprecedented change (Simon 2019). The first of the above aspects is a matter of planetary futures, while the second one is a matter of planetary history that planetary futures demand.

Ok, zacnu to brat trichu vazne.

A ikyz revolution will not be podcasted:

Stream episode Matt Christman of Chapo Trap House (In Conversation) by Upstream podcast | Listen online for free on SoundCloud
https://m.soundcloud.com/upstreampodcast/matt-christman-of-chapo-trap-house-in-conversation

TUHO: jake to ma duskedky pro planetaritu? :)

This Element provides an accessible introduction to ecosemiotics and demonstrates its pertinence for the study of today's unstable culture-nature relations. Ecosemiotics can be defined as the study of sign processes responsible for ecological phenomena. The arguments in this Element are developed in three steps that take inspiration from both humanities and biological sciences: 1) Showing the diversity, reach and effects of sign-mediated relations in the natural environment from the level of a single individual up the functioning of the ecosystem. 2) Demonstrating numerous ways in which prelinguistic semiotic relations are part of culture and identifying detrimental environmental effects that self-contained and purely symbol-based sign systems, texts and discourses bring along. 3) Demonstrating how ecosemiotic analysis centred on models and modelling can effectively map relations between texts and the natural environment, or the lack thereof, and how this methodology can be used artistically to initiate environmentally friendly cultural forms and practices.

Ecosemiotics
https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/abs/ecosemiotics/D29658F0C2E12040454C776F82627253

TADEAS: