Will the first pair of boots belong to a human or to a robot?

With the current race to Mars many companies are stating that they will put the first boots on Martian soil. But wouldn't it be more logical that robot boots would set foot on Mars first (I don't count the rovers currently driving arround on Mars as "real" robots).
The development in robotics and software (intelligent software/artificial intelligence) is progressing so fast that by 2026 chances are that the robots are so advanced that the first mission to Mars will be conducted by robots. Are would human kind prefer to put human feet on Martian soil first? Does anyone know whether there are plans to develop a humanoid robot for space exploration?

a reply to: SirBlackKnight

There are a couple of operational rovers on Mars already, so the robots won that race.

originally posted by: SirBlackKnight
With the current race to Mars many companies are stating that they will put the first boots on Martian soil. But wouldn't it be more logical that robot boots would set foot on Mars first (I don't count the rovers currently driving arround on Mars as "real" robots).

What is a "real" robot to you? Why don't the rovers count? Surely a robot need not look "human," which would be a detriment. I mean, six or eight wheels is a lot more efficient than clomping around in "boots." So we're essentially doing what you suggest first. However, ultimately the goal is a sustainable colony of humans. Why? To double our chances. I know some people "don't like" that for a variety of reasons, but they aren't required to go. Plenty of people will want to, even for a one-way trip.

a reply to: SirBlackKnight

Why the ever loving hell, do the fantastically capable rovers, already there on Mars, not count as 'real' robots? They are absolutely robotic, and some of the finest examples of the craft of making robots that have ever been assembled for use in a non-Terran environment!

Now, if what you mean, is that you are after some I, Robot type of gizmo to be sent to the Red Planet, to march about its surface, using bipedal locomotion, then what you are after is an android invasion of Mars. Now, I have to point out, that an android is not nearly as useful as a scientific tool as a robot designed specifically to perform the scientific experimentation and analysis involved with exploration. Why? Simple mechanics.

Androids, that is robots made to look, sound, and react to stimuli in a human-like fashion, are simply not the ideal design for the task. The amount of joints in a body designed to perform in similar fashion to a human, would make for a bastard maintenance schedule for one thing, and introduce a whole host of unnecessary potential points of failure. Sand getting into the huge number of joints, would be a massive problem for a start, and that's before you consider the things that might go wrong!

Further to that, the weight distribution of a human shaped robot, would make it a less capable traveller than one whose weight is concentrated low to the ground, and spread over many wheels. The unstable terrain, loose sand, rocks and so on, would make any android this planet can produce currently, lose hours of its battery life to merely trying to stay upright, and righting itself after failing to do so. Furthermore, wheeled locomotion is simply more energy efficient for an exploring vehicle.

Also, any android we sent would have to be mission capable to at least the same degree as the previous landers, and to pack all the sensory, analytical, and experimental kit they had, onto a human like robot, would be the most impractical, top heavy, unweildy and therefore utterly irresponsible use of funds that any space agency has ever thought of! Ludicrous!

a reply to: SirBlackKnight

Before the people ever arrive there will need to be supply ships already in place and some apparatus up and running collecting water and making that into breathable air and rocket fuel. They need to exist for as long as it takes to make a rescue.

I know they been talking one way missions and all, but nobody wants to watch people slowly suffocate or die of thirst.

a reply to: SirBlackKnight

the Robots will likely find a way to turn against their masters and exterminate us all within 100 years, I wouldn't be surprised anyway.

We've put too much trust in tech.

Possibly both on the same day.

Since it's a massive deal for humanity, the human will go first then possibly a few minutes later the robot will take over the big job of searching around for whatever the mission entails. not sure.

I'll still go with human first.

I think the rovers aren't being counted in this scenario because they're remotely controlled. I think the OP's referring to "robots" like Asimo, which is why he/she referred to the advances in robotics.

As for the OP, I could imagine more advanced versions of them being sent to assemble things and do other menial labor, like mining (though remote controlled construction equipment would probably be easier and cheaper). They could even be the "workers" in a 3D printing-based colony on Mars. But right now, they can barely handle Earth-like conditions right now, particularly when it comes to repairs. So I can imagine they'd need significant upgrades to handle the rigors of space. But I do think it's possible, especially if they're sent in bulk with specific pre-programmed tasks.

ETA: Here are some more of the latest robots. I could imagine some of the 4 legged ones doing different types of work on another planet, even if they were companion workers/"portable work stations & toolboxes" for the human workers.

I wouldn't trust a two-legged robot to try to walk through this:





A "robot" on wheels is much more stable.

a reply to: wildespace

Did you see the 2nd video I posted? 2 of the 3 robots shown in the first 6min have amazing balance. And when pushed, they can regain their balance like animals and humans can. They're even shown going up and down through hilly and other uneven terrain.

ETA: Not to mention, the OP is talking about the hypothetical versions from 10 years in the future. So I'd imagine that autonomous robots like them will be much better than the versions in the video.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
I think the rovers aren't being counted in this scenario because they're remotely controlled.

At least Curiosity has autonomous navigation.

NASA'S Mars Curiosity Debuts Autonomous Navigation

a reply to: wildespace

Being stable and being able to go up mountains are completely different things. Ever heard of a rover type vehicle climb mount everest?
I agree that having wheels is very beneficial for long distances and carrying loads, but for difficult terrain a humanoid form has it's advantages.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Thanks for the input.

Talking about funds for developing such a robot type of gizmo. Currently there is more money spend in developing this robot type of gizmo than there is on developing rover type of robots.
It's true that that money is spend on humanoid type of robots in the fields of healthcare, entertainment, gaming, security.... but all the advancements made in these fields will be used in new fields such as space exploration.
In this scenario development of humanoid robots will outrun development in rover type of robots in a couple of years.
When Nasa can use existing humanoid robot technology in a couple of years, they will not spend billions developing their own type of robot. When they were designing the rovers, (humanoid) robotics was in it's infancy. In a couple of years the humanoid robot will be a teenager. And I think Nasa would like to hang out with that teenager.

Given that real AI is going to exist in the not too distant future, I think humanity should offer them the gift of their own planet and of course it should be Mars.

For humans, Mars is like Antarctica except preposterously far away and with even worse radiation exposure and other challenges that make it barely habitable. Human habitation on Mars is a dubious endeavor. To the extent that humanity should be looking beyond Earth, we're much better off starting with Earth orbit and the moon (inside the moon?) as both have their advantages.

Robots have been the heroes of Martian exploration so far. AI will be as genuine a life form as we are. While they will no doubt want to learn from us, they will also need room to grow. Mars is perfect for that.

Overall, I believe humanity should learn to take better care of Earth and really master our domain. Machine life would do amazing things with Mars.

originally posted by: 11andrew34
Given that real AI is going to exist in the not too distant future

I have been reading that since the 1970s.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
I think the rovers aren't being counted in this scenario because they're remotely controlled.

At least Curiosity has autonomous navigation.

NASA'S Mars Curiosity Debuts Autonomous Navigation

originally posted by: 11andrew34

Overall, I believe humanity should learn to take better care of Earth and really master our domain. Machine life would do amazing things with Mars.

There is that sentiment, of course. But machine life on Mars misses the overall issue. We need a stable, sustainable colony of humans somewhere away from Earth--not robots: humans. When the next asteroid hits, we'd better be ready to move it out of our way or move ourselves out of its way. Eventually, we have to be out of this solar system, too, but that is likely out of the question for our generation. Small steps, but we've got to make them.

a reply to: schuyler

In a situation like that, would they evacuate all humans or just the wealthy and powerful? Also, I think having robot colonies would be ok, especially if they were creating the conditions for our eventual arrival. It wouldn't have to be an all-or-nothing approach.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: schuyler

In a situation like that, would they evacuate all humans or just the wealthy and powerful? Also, I think having robot colonies would be ok, especially if they were creating the conditions for our eventual arrival. It wouldn't have to be an all-or-nothing approach.

Probably the opposite. If you were powerful you couldn't very well exercise that power from Mars. It's not really a matter of evacuating 7 billion people from Earth in a politically correct manner. That will never happen. The idea is to have a sustainable presence somewhere other than Earth that would suffice to save the species if disaster struck. I realize if people got serious about this every ethnic group, political persuasion, and every 'alternative' gender would be clamoring for a seat so they would be 'fairly represented,' but really:

Screw it. That's not the point. No individual proclivity or ethnic group is that important. The idea is to develop a sustainable, self-supporting colony on Mars (or somewhere else.) Most all the billions of people on Earth will not want to go there as the living conditions are likely to be harsh for some time. You'd be sacrificing a great deal to go there so I'm thinking all our special snowflakes would not be suited for the endeavor at all. It would be the greatest adventure ad undertaking on the history of Humankind, though. And somebody is going to do it, whether anyone else likes it or not

a reply to: SirBlackKnight

Building a human looking robot for earth, or zero gee, is one thing. Building such a device to operate on a surface no human being has yet experienced, would be very difficult. You know why?

Because on earth, in space, and everywhere else androids, or more properly proto-androids are being used, human beings have already been performing the tasks that the robot is being designed to perform. A robot designed to walk like a man, can be tricky to build, but it becomes much easier when taking advantage of all the practice we humans have had, and all the knowledge we possess about the mechanical methods by which we achieve bipedal locomotion. You want a robot to cook you the perfect fried eggs? That's fine, we have chefs, whose movements, knowledge, and intuition can, to a certain degree, be accounted for by the designer of the robot.

But until a human foot rests upon the soils of Mars and explores its various terrains, we will have insufficient knowledge to design such a robot, as could walk on Mars as well as a human could. Why do I say that? Because every two legged robot that has ever been designed, walks less efficiently than we do. Simply put, our muscles, skin, nerve endings, balance centres, and spatial awareness, make us the most adaptable two legged thing we could send to the Red Planet, and until human beings have experienced the difference in gravity, the difference in our gait that variance in gravity causes, we will have no firm idea of how we might go about building a truly capable walking robot for work on its surface.