[–] oliculipolicula 2 days ago
[–] adrian_b 2 days ago
The former requires some scientific breakthroughs for which it is unpredictable when they will happen.
The latter is an engineering problem with very little unknowns, which is guaranteed to be solvable today if enough money are provided for it.
Until now, the additional costs for rotating ships could be avoided, as long as humans did not go farther away than the Moon.
For an expedition to Mars or even to some more distant celestial body, currently there is no known way that would avoid severe health damage for the humans, without using artificial gravity.
The experiments on the ISS have shown that for mice a gravity of at least 2/3 of that of Earth is required to completely avoid all health problems, while a gravity of at least 1/3 of that of Earth is necessary to avoid the most dangerous health problems.
It is unlikely that humans will prove to be much more resilient than mice.
[–] oliculipolicula 2 days ago
(Yes I agree rotating spaceships are cool/feasible, but what if you are dead set on finding "benefits" of microgravity?)
And out there, you have free radiation for that accelerated evolution..
The following isn't more absurd, in fact opposite, alas. A much better payoff than microgravitated materials research, and further, it makes sense to start NOW