A recent preprint paper examines the minimum number of people required to maintain a feasible settlement on Mars while accounting for psychological and behavioral factors, specifically in emergency situations. This study was conducted by a team of data scientists from George Mason University and holds the potential to help researchers better understand the appropriate conditions …

  • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    10 months ago

    You want a colony consisting only of fanatics? Then 22 may be the number. It’s going to be 22 very different types, and every one of them has to decide every day that this is going to last long…

    If you want a colony consisting of normal people that lasts for long, then you need thousands. Humans need a lot diversity before they can be normal and stay healthy.

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Considering humanity was knocked down to about 1200 people about 800,000 years ago and we survived without any technology to speak of, let alone genetic testing that would help determine maximum diversity, I’d say you might be surprised.

      • ahornsirup@artemis.camp
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        That assumes that everyone will be willing to have children with just about anyone, regardless of their personal opinion of them, and regardless of whether or not they even want children to begin with. You can’t selectively breed humans without massive human rights violations.

    • AEsheron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I recall a similar study years ago. They concluded 32 was minimal viable, assuming a strict breeding regiment over several generations, with 8 men and 24 women. They also concluded about 500 would be the smallest practical size, given people aren’t robots and losing even a couple people before leaving the breeding pool would be very bad. That was a fundamentally different study though, looking at long term, self sufficiency. This one seems more focused on an Antarctica like outpost that would be able to cycle people in and out, and not establishing a full on colony.

    • wahming@monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      It’s not about building a local population on Mars that will populate the planet, it’s about the bare minimum to operate an outpost with regular supply drops from earth and replacement personnel in case of fatalities.