Would human dwarfs be better to use in space explorations, since they occupy less space and need less to live.

Question

Human dwarfs are a fisable way of sending humans to mars since they occupy less space and use less resources to survive.
I believe NASA should consider healthy dwarfs for deeper space explorations, since in an infinitly huge universe, the size of a human does'nt really matter.

Answer 1

So the aliens ar just the dwrfs from some other planet .. Very intersting.How tall are you?

Answer 2

well,what if they encountered some form of extraterrestrial inteliggence?the ETs woud think that all humans are dwrafts or something.we need to send someone that represents all humans.



and i do belive the was inteligence life on mars at one point of time.or maybe theres some underground.also,how does the nasa plan to find any life if they look inside rocks and that robot is way to small,they shoul've sent like a hummer or something so it could go to the poles and explore more stuff.

Answer 3

certain. robot area exploration is sensible, yet people could locate area too. As former astronaut Dave Scott suggested in the e book Voices From The Moon through Andrew Chaikin, "you won't be able to locate with out the concept and the judgment and the interest and the intuitive nature of guy. you only won't be able to attempt this. guy is going to locate the universe, and pioneer, and settle the universe. there is absolute self assurance; that is only at the same time as. you do not could do it this three hundred and sixty 5 days or next three hundred and sixty 5 days, besides the indisputable fact that it's going to get executed." And as former astronaut John youthful suggested in the documentary the sweetness Of all of it, "Why do people locate in the first position? that is for the lengthy-time period renovation of the species, you recognize, no matter if in area or in medicine or anyplace you're exploring, the interest of people is to keep going."

Answer 4

While this question is asked sincerely, I am personally troubled by it and find it slightly offensive.

"They" are still human beings with feeling and dignity, as should not be treated as resources we can assign to a specific task ("they occupy less space and need less to live").

There is also a very fine line between this and human exploitation, which is deeply abhorent. So let's be careful in this topic.

Answer 5

Human dwarfs do take up less space but don't really need less to survive. They are pretty much on par with all "regular" size people when it comes to needs and most often need more due to their situation. So it wouldn't really help anything to send them into space except to use smaller ships, but that isn't saving much.

Answer 6

I think that this idea should be treated seriously. If you can build a ship with smaller living quarters, you might cut the size of your whole ship substantially. Also, short people do need less calories--look at any diet chart. And less calories means less Oxygen requirements.

In a similar vein, we can look a jockeys, and of course, females should be preferred over males due to less calorie / oxygen requirements.

Answer 7

Ummm,not really sure. I can see your question was not meant offensive in any manner. I suppose there is the question about medical issues too. Their bodily functions might be ok, but they are definently at a less advantage in some ways. As for oxygen consumption, perhaps your right.

Answer 8

There is no such thing as a healthy dwarf. There would be so many billions of dollars wasted into making everything midiget friendly.

Answer 9

Most people with dwarfism or other height restricting disorders also suffer other health problems as well.

This doesn't neccisarily make them un-space worthy but they would have to re-engineer many facilities used by astronauts.

Answer 10

It's a fisable way? Perhaps feasible? I think you are not taking into account the limitations in mobility, and dexterity that dwarves lack.