An orbit is the path an object in space takes while it moves.

Generally objects in space

such as planets and comets take elliptical orbits around larger objects, such as a star.
An asteroid is a combination of rocks and iron that is too small to form a planet. There are
many asteroids that orbit the sun between the orbits of Jupiter and Mars.
A comet is a small body of gas and ice orbiting around the solar system. We can see the
tail of the comet because it is the sun heating and melting the ice. The most
famous comet is Halley's Comet which is visible from Earth every 75-76 years. The last
time it appears was in 1986 and will next appear in 2061.
A star is made up of clouds of gas and dust. Many people love to go outside at night and
count the stars, but there are so many that it is impossible for one person to count them all.
A constellation is a group of bright stars that form shapes or 'pictures' in the sky. The
Southern Cross is a constellation in the Southern hemisphere that points towards the
South Pole. The Big Dipper is a constellation in the Northern hemisphere that is in the
shape of a ladle or a large spoon.
The sun is the star in the middle of our solar system. The eight planets in our solar system
all orbit around the sun. The closest planet to the sun is Mercury and then comes Venus.
The planet that we live on is called Earth. It is the third closest planet to the sun in our solar
system. Mars is the fourth planet from the sun. It is a small red planet, named after the
roman god of war. Jupiter is the largest of all the planets in the solar system. The next
planet isSaturn which has thin rings around it. Uranus and Neptune are the next two
planets after Saturn. Pluto used to be considered a planet, but now is called a dwarf planet
because it is so small. Its orbit is further away from the sun than any of the other planets.
A solar eclipse is when the moon's orbit comes between the earth and the sun and it looks
like the sun is blacked out. We can only see the edge of the sun around the moon. A lunar
eclipse is when the earth prevents sunlight from reaching the moon.
Because the moon orbits the Earth and the Earth orbits the sun we can only see parts of
the moon at a time. This cycle happens every month. A new moon is when we can not see
any of it. This shows the beginning of the cycle. Half way through the month we can see
the full moon. A full moon makes the sky bright at night because it reflects the light of the
sun.
The galaxy we live in is called the Milky Way. It is made up of billions of stars.
A telescope is an instrument which has reflective lenses that allows us to see the objects
in the sky closer and clearer. It magnifies objects that normally cannot be seen unaided.
Some telescopes are very powerful and can be used to see thousands of light years away.
There are many large powerful telescopes in the north of Chile.

An astronaut is a person who leaves Earth and goes into space. Many of them work in the
international space station and do scientific experiments. Astronauts need to wear space
suits because it is very cold in space and they do not have oxygen to breath.
A spacecraft is any type of vehicle used for travelling in space. There are many different
types of spacecrafts. Aspace shuttle is a spacecraft used for repeated use in between
earth and a space station and contains astronauts.
A rocket is the type of plane that astronauts used to use to fly into space. Now they are
used to leave satellites in orbit around the Earth. It has a special cylindrical shape so that it
can go very fast for a long distance.
A space probe is a type of space craft that does not have a person inside. Space
probes can be sent to far away distances for long periods of time to gather information
about different areas in space.
A lunar module is a small craft used for travelling between the moon and the larger space
craft orbiting the moon. When the first men walked on the moon they came out of the lunar
module. The first man to walk on the moon said "One small step for man, one giant leap for
mankind."
Many people have said that they have seen unidentified flying objects, or UFOs but it is
unclear what these objects are and who or what is inside of them. Some people believe
they contain aliens.

As telescopes increase in power and researchers learn more about the substances and
conditions, spotted from afar, that would herald extraterrestrial life, scientists get closer
to potentially identifying such signs of life on other planets. And if life appears in distinct
clusters that contain many different stars, it makes it much more likely that organisms
can proliferate across the galaxy.

The benefits of space exploration are mainly scientific while the disadvantages are
largely economic.
When we explore space we (hopefully) learn a great deal about the universe in
which we live. We learn about how other heavenly bodies like Mars developed. We
learn about the makeup of comets and add to our theories about how the building
blocks of life might have come to Earth. All of these things are of immense interest
to science.
The disadvantages of space exploration (and particularly manned exploration) have
to do with costs. Exploring space costs huge amounts of money. At a time like the
present, it is questionable as to whether that money is well-spent on space
exploration.

Today, space exploration largely benefits only scientists while imposing serious
costs on a society that is having economic problems.
Much of Star Trek deals with colonies on Earthtype planets in other solar systems. But do we
have any assurances that Earth-like worlds are as common in the Milky Way galaxy as they are
in Hollywood, California? The future scenario that Gene Roddenberry presented seems clear
enough. We would build cities on the moon, colonies on Mars, habitations wherever there was
solid ground underfoot and gravity to keep you from drifting away. We occasionally see orbiting
star bases, sure, but these are only way stations, refueling depots, laboratories. The crew can
look forward to going home on completion of their tour of duty. Even if "home" is not Earth, then
it is surely a planet, or at least a moon. These lines of thought are no different from what serious
futurologists predicted and went completely unchallenged until the work of Professor Gerard K.
O'Neill.
In 1969 O'Neill asked some of Princeton University's finest science and engineering
students the following question: Is the surface of the Earth really the best place for an
expanding industrial society? After some initial research was done, it seemed that the best place
for our technological civilization is not on Earth or even on a planetary surface. A space habitat,
orbiting in free space, would seem to have many advantages over any planetary home.
A space habitat will most likely be in the form of a sphere pressurized with air and spinning
to simulate gravity. Sunlight is brought in with mirrors and windows. The interior can be
landscaped to look very much like Earth. Hauling up the materials to construct this miniworld
from Earth's deep "gravity well" would make the project too expensive to even consider, so we
will use lunar materials that will require only one twentieth of the energy for their retrieval. The
moon will provide oxygen, silicon, aluminum, and titanium. The asteroids can supply carbon,
hydrogen, and nitrogen.
When the calculations were finished, it seemed evident that planets actually represent the
hard way to go about doing things. A planet uses a tremendous amount of mass to create a
gravity field and hold down an atmosphere, while a simple rotating, pressurized structure can
achieve much the same effect. A good illustration of this principle is the fact that the asteroid belt
alone contains sufficient resources to create, in the form of space habitats, three thousand times
the land area of the Earth. However, if all of the asteroids were lumped together into a planet,
that planet would be tinier than our moon. Besides this incredible economy of mass, are there
other advantages of space living over planet living?
There has been much talk about becoming a solar society, but thus far it has been "talk"
only. There is a good reason why we cannot shift over to a full scale solar economy and it is
because solar energy is inconstant here on the surface of the Earth. Solar power is blocked by
the shadow of the Earth at night, is interrupted by cloudy weather, and even on a "clear" day is
filtered by miles of atmosphere. Consequently, we have obtained energy by constant, although
indirect, means (I.E., fossil fuels).
In space, outside the shadow of the Earth, solar energy is constant and reliable. The
builders of an aluminum smelting plant in space can confidently count on using solar energy to
power their facilities without worrying about energy shortages, the rising cost of fuel, or
environmental impact. Any time we go down to a planet, we will be faced with limitations on the
amount of solar energy that we can use. Planets with atmospheres, in particular, not only further
limit the use of solar power, but also have weather that must be given consideration when
building large structures.

What Would be the Advantages and Disadvantages of Human

Settlements on Other Planets?
Human Settlements on Other Planets still sound like
science fiction, but this could become reality in as soon as thirty
years. Scientists from all over the world are preparing for the
colonisation of Mars in 2050. They are aiming for hundreds of people
to work and live on this planet. People started thinking about it ninety
years ago, and, in fact, the colonisation of space has already started.
There is only one more step to take, before this new era will change
our lives.
Possible psychological problems like agoraphobia or stress could
be a barrier to the colonisation of Mars. Evidence for this phenomenon
already exists: in one of the Skylab missions, the crew stopped
working, because it had too much to do. They started playing games
and did not at work at all, for three days.
...read more.

Middle
There are many opponents of settlements on other planets,
because of the huge cost of the project. One journey to Mars would
cost about 200 Billion Euros. Why should we spend that much money
for the colonisation of the rusty particle of dust in space? There are
much more important problems on our planet and the lower gravity
could split the human race. We would only create new problems. But
it seems as if the adversaries forget that the USA spend every year

330 Billion Euros (2002) in the military. That is more than enough for
one Mars Mission.
Adversaries of settlements on other planets say that it would be
a mistake to neglect the problems of the earth (like the Greenhouse
Effect or overpopulation) by escaping to another planet. If the main
aim of the humanity would be settlements on other planets, we
inevitably would overlook the more important problems on Earth.
Every five seconds somebody dies because of hunger. One can see
that this situation has to be changed first.
...read more.

Conclusion
The colonisation of other planets could unite mankind because it
would have a common aim. If the colonisation of Mars would really
start, the whole humanity would be in an euphoric atmosphere.
People would understand that all human beings are equal. People
would understand that we are one mankind. Wars could end. The
leaders of the worlds countries could shake their hand. National
differences would loose their importance. The economic force of the
earths countries would increase and everybody would know the he is
a citizen of the world. Nobody knows whether this will really happen.
However, it is possible.
For this purpose, the mankind is able to colonise Mars. It should
do it. It is the only way to ensure the next generations a great future.
There is no argument against the project that could really keep us
from settling on other planets. People will fall in, and get their children

on Mars. They will laugh about the sentence Settlements on other

planets still sound like science fiction. The next evolutionary step
would be done.
Mars is a fascinating planet, the most like Earth of all the planets in the solar
system, and may help us to understand much about the origins of life on Earth.
Undoubtedly, it's a wonderful place to explore, especially with augmented reality
vision. But though it was quite Earth-like in its first few hundred million years, it is
not at all Earth like now. Earth remains by far the most habitable place in our solar
system. The most inhospitable places on Earth, such as Antarctica, even in the
depths of winter, and at the centre of the continent, are far more habitable than
anywhere else in our solar system. Space colonies and the poles of the Moon, are
both more easily habitable than Mars, and more easy to make self sufficient. Why is
that? Read on to find out more.
You see so many news stories about the possibility of humans colonizing Mars, and
many readers may get really excited by the idea. But few of these stories mention
the many drawbacks and downsides of human colonization. I thought it might help
redress the balance to talk about this.

1. Cold
You would agree that the center of Antarctica in winter is cold, not the best of
places to set up home? Well Mars is far colder. At the Curiosity site, which is close
to the equator, typical night time temperatures are -70 C. Occasionally it drops to
below -100 C. It is often cold enough for the CO2 in the atmosphere to freeze out
as dry ice. A human couldn't survive those temperatures without technology.
If you are just looking for new land for humans to live in, there are many
uninhabited areas of Earth that could be made habitable with the levels of
technology proposed for Mars. It makes much more sense to colonize Canada, or
Siberia, or the Inner Hebrides of Scotland (where I live) or the Arizona or Sahara
deserts, or indeed the sea bed, than Mars.

Contamination
It is almost inevitable that a colony on Mars will eventually contaminate the planet
with Earth micro-organisms. At current levels of technology, I don't see how that
can be avoided. A human is host to about 100 trillion micro-organisms in 10,000
different species. A habitat would have many other micro-organisms too, in the
food, in the soil, other supplies, and floating in the air.

Some of those may be able to reproduce on the surface, particularly lichens, and
some hardy micro-organisms, polyextremophiles that may be able to survive in
marginal habitats of cold salty brine that may form around deliquescing salts in the
morning and evening. See my Might there be Microbes on the surface of Mars?.
Some of these can do just fine in human habitats but have surprising hidden
capabilities to survive in extreme conditions. The rovers are sterilized to prevent
contamination - humans can't be.
Now if you aren't a scientist that mightn't bother you much. But back on Earth you
would be known as the people who irreversibly contaminated Mars. You would
probably get a fair bit of negative press for doing that, and through all the future of
human history would probably be known as much as the humans who contaminated
Mars as the first to colonize the planet. For some idea of the potential value of a
pristine Mars see How Valuable is Pristine Mars for Humanity - Opinion Piece?
This would make it hard or impossible to tell whether or not any of the life forms
you find on the planet are introduced Earth life or native (many micro-organisms on
Earth are poorly characterized). It would also complicate experiments to look for
trace biosignatures in the deposits on Mars, some of these sensitive enough to
detect a single amino acid in a gram of soil.
The contamination could also affect your water supplies. There's also the possibility
that it could evolve on the surface through adaptive radiation into new forms
hazardous to humans, because the conditions are so different (strong UV, cosmic
radiation etc). These then could return to the habitats some years later, still
retaining their abilities to survive in a human habitat, but with extra capabilities
from their evolution on the surface of Mars.
Some sources for contamination include

Habitat not completely self contained - e.g. maybe you need to dispose
of human wastes outside the habitat - or some chemical builds up which needs to
be vented to the exterior.

Spacesuits leak. The problem is - that the more flexible the spacesuit, then
the more joints it has, and these continuously leak air. Could you contain microorganisms within the spacesuit without them leaking out of the joints?

Airlock. It may be possible to do something about this, but no-one has yet
designed an airlock that vents no air at all out of the spaceship. The suitport gets
close to this, but is designed more to prevent dust getting into the cabin than to
prevent air getting out. Some air would still escape, about a cubic foot in the
current design of the suitport.

Accidents. E.g. spacesuit breached in an accident on the surface. Or one of

the spaceships crashes during landing. Even if crew survive, the hull may be

breached and contaminate Mars with the micro-organisms inside the habitat. If
anyone dies, then that is a major contamination right away.

9. Accidents
Okay so accidents happen. On Mars they may well be fatal if they result in damage
of your spacesuit or habitat.
Also, in a vacuum, you can die just because you have forgotten one step in your
checklist while you put on your spacesuit - or because you get interested in what
you are doing and forget to allow enough time to get back within your oxygen
reserves. Or just get delayed, e.g. a sprained ankle on Mars might well kill you
because you then can't get back to your oxygen supply in time to top up.
And if you get caught in a solar storm, that could be deadly again if you are far
from the nearest shielded habitat or rover at the time.
In the future we may use robots for exploring most of the time rather than humans
for safety reasons even when there are humans close by who could go. Especially
for really long duration multiple day EVAs, rovers controlled by telerobotics may
become the norm rather than humans. No need to carry food, oxygen or water.
Able to just stop anywhere and work on something for days on end or just spend
days or weeks on a single experiment out in the open. The people operating them
via telerobotics can switch from one to another, as you do with the game
civilization, doing all the interesting things, while the robots do the boring stuff.
"Robots do it better" may well be a slogan much in use in future space settlements.

10. Mars is too small to be worth colonizing

Yes I know the surface area of Mars is large, comparable to that of Earth. But there
are several other consequences of such a small planet.

Cosmic Radiation - high levels, would need to limit the amount of time you
spend on or near the surface without protection from the cosmic radiation otherwise you have an elevated chance of getting cancer.
Low gravity - so far it's not known whether humans can remain healthy
long term in a Mars gravity. Same is true for the Moon but is easier to return sick
astronauts from the Moon to Earth, e.g. if it is found that bone loss is as bad in low
gravity as in zero g. There have been many biologically surprising results for zero g,
and there may be surprises for low g as well.
The human body is complex, and impossible to simulate in detail in a computer
model. You can't just draw a straight line from zero g to full g and interpolate to
find the effect of low g. For all we know, it could even be worse than zero g or
better than full g in its effects on human health.

Solution to all of this for Mars - telepresence

So, I'm not "against mars colonization". Would be great if these problems
could be solved and maybe with some future technology they could be.
Perhaps self healing spacesuits and spaceships, able to hold in
contamination even in a hard landing or accident? Perhaps some successor
to the suitport that is self cleaning and lets no air escape at all? Or we might
find out things about Mars that lead us to decide that it is okay to introduce
Earth micro-organisms to it.

But in the meantime, space colonies would seem to make much more sense
than a Mars surface colony. But Mars is such an interesting place to explore
especially for scientists. With enhanced vision, the boring landscape would
become interesting to look at and explore. And our mechanical rovers on
Mars are so slow, experiments take months to complete, and they do in a
month what a human could do probably in an hour.

So, what can we do? Well the answer is telepresence. The technology is
developing rapidly, both through the games industry, and through various
applications such as remote telepresence surgery (surgeons in the USA
operating on patients in France for instance), and field geology especially
deep wells.

With humans in orbit around Mars, then they could explore the surface with
telepresence. You get super human abilities too, as you can build telerobots
able to fly (hard for a heavy human to do in the thin Mars atmosphere), or
smaller or stronger than humans.

Although Star Trek's artificial gravity remains a fiction, a space inhabitant need not do without
gravity as long as a habitat can be rotated. In space, one can have gravitational freedom. Any G
force, from zero, to a fraction, to full, to in excess of a G can be produced by the appropriate
rotational speed or lack thereof. Planets, on the other hand, have gravities that can't simply be
turned off. Gravity places limits on the efficiencies obtainable for transportation. There is reason
to believe that certain materials can be made in zero G that either cannot be made, or can be
made only in small amounts, in a gravity field. Gravity also limits the size of structures that we
can build on a planet. In space there is no reason why artifacts many cubic kilometers in volume
cannot be built.
When we talk about a planet we are talking about a large but nonetheless finite
environment. When we talk instead about living in space we have moved into the realm of the
infinite. The resources of the Solar system are beyond human comprehension and the
resources of the universe are as close to infinite as we need concern ourselves with. Using

these materials to construct space colonies, we can provide all of the land area that any
foreseeable population growth could require. With industry moved into space, our civilization
could evolve toward what we see in Star Trek: a society enjoying all of the benefits of hightech
living without the disadvantages of pollution and destruction of the natural environment.
When we speak of bringing in extraterrestrial materials or energies we are discussing the
creation of new wealth, not merely the redistribution of wealth already here. Isaac Asimov, the
famed science writer, has observed that energy derived from space would not be geography
bound. There would no longer be energy rich or energy poor areas. The same can be said of
space resources. A shipment of asteroidal steel can be sent to one part of the planet as easily
as another.
If these ideas are correct, then by the 23rd century there could conceivably be more
people living in space than on Earth. The surface of our world, free of the major, voracious,
polluting industries could be restored to a more natural, parklike form. Earth's main industry
would then be tourism. The "Star Trek scenario" of searching through innumerable solar
systems for a place to live where you don't have to carry your air in a bottle may become
unnecessary in a universe where you can manufacture your own miniworld to your own
specifications.
One of the most profound points of the space colonization concept is that now any star
system can be inhabited. Nothing would delight a space colonist more than, upon arriving at
another solar system, discovering rings of asteroids but no planets. What use would he/she
have for steep gravity wells? The assumption that other intelligences in the universe might use
similar techniques to colonize space vastly increases the odds that we will find them. On the
more practical side, man's options are also vastly increased. If we use the technology that we
have wisely, we can utilize all of the energy and natural resources that we and our children
could ever need. Once man is out into space there will be no more limits to growth. With the
seed of man spread throughout the galaxy the human species would, in effect, become
immortal.