Well, elon, you need no introduction, but for those who don't know, you are the founder and chief engineer of SpaceX and into the Mars Society, and we're delighted to have you back. You've got nine thousand people registered to hear you today.
All right, cool sounds good.
Okay, So usually like.
Change this perspective. Let's say, if I change the perspective, is that better or is that worse?
I think you were better before?
Okay, okay, so listen.
Uh, why don't we just start out with the basis you started SpaceX to make humanity multiplanetary. Yeah, why do you see that as a critical goal?
Yes? I think we want to be on track to become a multipad species and a space brank civilization in order to find out what the universe will all about, like what you know? Uh, and ensure the continuance of consciousness as we know it. Far as we know, we're the only life. I mean, people think there's aliens, but obviously I haven't seen any sign of aliens. So as far as we know, we're the only the only life.
Whether we could be the only life, So let's put it that way, and we need to take the set of actions that are most likely to make the future good and result in the continuance of consciousness as we know it.
Okay, so okay, well, obviously your your means to that end is to open the space frontier with reusable launch vehicles, and you've gone through some partially useful ones and now it's starship.
Can you explain that basically the line of thinking that led you to the starship design?
I forget. What I need to look at is look like I'm looking at the camera. So let's see. Well, on the starship front, we've gone through many iterations, starting from not really knowing how to build rockets at all with Falcon one and having four failures actually in reaching orbit. Yeah, the sorry three failures, and then the fourth one got to orbit. So fourth one is a charm, so we only barely survived. I was at zero cash basically when we got that fourth one to orbit, and if that
fourth one hadn't worked, we would have been curtains. So it's definitely not been smooth sailing. It's been very difficult ride with just a lot that has been discovered along the way. I mean, just just trying to figure out what questions to ask about the design it was was quite difficult. I think it's helpful to have as the objective the creation of a self sustaining city on Mars. I think this is this has to be the objective, not simply a few people or a base, but a
self sustaining city. The acid test really is if the if the ships from Earth stopped coming for any reason, does Mars die out for any reason? It could be from a banal, or it could be nuclear. Again, it doesn't matter if the if the ship stopped coming for any reason, does the city on Mars die out? If it does, we have not We're not in a secure place.
So I mean, I think this really might come down to, you know, the great filter front is this, are we going to create a self sustaining city on Mars before or after World War three? And I think the probably of it being created after World War three hopefully hopefully this's never world War three, but after is low. So we should try to create to make the city self sustaining before any possible World War three. This is just
a risk. This is not you know, I mean not as people have difficulty to dealing with with probability to see that this way or that way. But it's really we just face a series of probabilities and there's some chance that we will have a giant ore or a super volcano, or you know, a commet might have the Earth, or we might just self extinguish in some Uh, it might be more of a more more of a whimper
than a bang. And frankly, right now, civilization is not looking super strong, you know, it is looking a little rettal rickety right now. Frank would you.
Say that it's it's more than a life boat that would actually make you civilization more clearly more able to divert asteroids from hitting the earth and uh otherwise.
Help, Yeah, it's not it's not an escape, it's a it's simply something that it's like you can, I mean less modes mars is made self sustaining, which will probably not happen in my lifetime. It is certainly not its meaning, it's meaningless to have an escape, you know, a life boat or or or escape patch or something if you will. You're simply moving to another place where you will soon
die out. That doesn't count so much of a life boat really, So this is really about minimizing existential risk for civilization as a whole and then having an exciting future that you can look forward to, and a future where we are a space ban civilization and multi plant species is far more exciting than one where we are not. I mean, that's an exciting future. And being forever confined to Earth until some eventual extinction event is depressing and
knock one. And we need things that make you want to get out of bed in the morning and be excited about the future. And I think being a space faring civilization it's one of those things that everyone can get excited about.
But can you maybe just kind of lead people along the path that led you from the design but from Falcon nine to Falcon Heavy, but now Starship is rather different than Falcon Heavy. The engineering.
Absolutely didn't quite answer your original question. You first have to say what is the goal? And once you have what is the goal, you can then measure various designs against that goal. Otherwise you're saying, how are you evaluating? Why is one design better than another? What's your goal? It's got to be a goal. So the goal is get enough ton in to Mars to and enough people to make Mars self sustaining as quickly as possible. So then you say, okay, let's back back out the math
on this. We're gonna need We're gonna lot of need, a lot of tonnage. Maybe I don't know, one hundred thousand tons, maybe a million tons. So you can't be fat and around with these expandable rockets. They're a joke. They're absode even Saturn, five tiny potatoes. We need it because if you want to get like, let's say, first order approximation a million tons the sofas of Mars, inclusive
of people. Uh, you know that that means probably something around four or five million useful tons of payload in the into low with orbit. You know, for every time you get to low with orbit, you're gonna get four or five tons, hopefully closer to five. It's it's you know these are this math is you really start squeezing like tiny percentages. But let's say it comfort confidently. If you've got five tons to low with orbit, you can get one ton tomorrow. That's that's confident. Maybe you can
get maybe maybe I only need four. Anyway, The point is you need five million tons into Earth orbit to get one million tons to Mars. Now, let's put this into perspective. Total global capacity to orbit of all expendable rockets is around around five or six hundred tons, I think. And if you said, okay, the world's going to end if you do not increase your capacity, perhaps they could do a thousand tons. Okay, So that's one five five thousand,
one five thousandth of what's needed. It's ridiculous, you know, it's it's not even you know, zero point one percent would be you know, one thousandth so way less than point one percent. We have way less point one percent of the capability needed to create a if everyone went full filled with expendable rockets. Expanded rockets are the absolute are just utterly stupid, in my opinion, utterly stupid. They are a complete waste of time. People should stop wasting
the time. If you try to sell an expendable plane, people would laugh the out of the room. If you trying to sell an expendable car, they would laugh the old room. Try to sell an expendable horse, they would laugh the out of the room and think there's something wrong with you mentally. So all of these things are reusable. It's essential to be reasonable. Now, creating a reusable rocket, obital rocket is very difficult. Doing a suborbital reusable rocket
is easy. Doing it a reasonable oval rocket is hard. Even when a lot of smart people have put quite a bit of effort into it. They might get two or three percent of the litron mass to lower vobit and a really epic rocket would get four. I'm not
sure every I do think anyone's e and four. So, but you basically need to have something that inexpendable form would probably get about four percent of its paler to orbit, such that you can spend about half of that four percent on reusability and still net out to around two
percent of Palo tourbit. So you have to make both the booster and the upper stage and the fairying and everything reusable with Falcon So with Falcon one, we did actually attempt to do this, So we had a parachute in the first stage, but really did not appreciate that that first stage was going to hit the atmosphere like a concrete wall. So at first I got pretty mad at the parachutes flare until I realized, yeah, it's not
their fault. We were just being cools that that thing was exploding as soon as it hit the atmosphere, and you know, so you really got to do something to ease the transition into the atmosphere. At Heimock number, it's very hot and it's a lot of force and a lot of heat. So then with falcon Hine we made a bigger rocket. And as scale matters here because you do get basically economies of scale. You can't have a
tiny rocket. There's a tiny rocket, you basically just end up carrying your electronics to orbit, so your avionics, you know, so in a little rocket, if you're small enough that just your your avionics a loane ends up being a significant percentage of your payload. And then you you know, if you've had a rocket that was I don't know, they're trying to get a ten thousand pound rocket, for example, or even a ten thousand kilogram rocket to all, but
I think you would basically get zero payload. Now as you get bigger, the rocket gets bigger, but the brain doesn't get bigger. The brain can say the same size, So your avionics, for example, become almost not almost zero end of the weight at for a big rocket. Then for big rockets you also get gauge advantages. So this is we're really in the nuances of rocket design and manufacturing. Here, if your things are very small, it's difficult to get
your gauge accurate. So the basically how thick is the material like you want to do castings, for example, there's a minimum gauge with thickness for a casting, there's a minimum kind of error bar on the you know, on this the material skins. Even for a composite rocket, you've got uh, you know, you start getting granularity issues as
you get bigger. You know you're no longer gauge limited, and you can get your your percentage accuracy on the thickness of walls and castings can be can be very good. These are the nuances that I think was no one appreciates, but I spice to say that there are advantages to size, and you can certainly see this many walks of life where if you've got a truck that's carrying cargo, it's more efficient to have a big semi truck, not a
bunch of little trucks. For ships, it would be pretty silly to see container ships or containers going across the ocean one at a time with little outboard motors. That would be silly. You put them on a container ship, you have big ships, not little little tiny ships. So anyway, so size matters, it really does, and for reusability matters.
So with Falcon nine, after a mess effort, we were able to achieve reusability of the booster, and we're mostly achieving reusability at this point with the faring as well.
But this is a this is a monumental effort, and I think within its architecture, Falcon nine is close to a local maximum if you a you know, gas gener cycle kerosene oxygen vehicle of this particular size with a twelve phot or three point six meters diameter, which is which is that size for because of road transport limitation, so you go bigger than that, you can transport it over the road and your logistics class become extreme. So but having a long, thin rocket is not very mass efficient.
You end up having to have thicker skins to take out the vending moment. So we're and then and having like kerosene is not the right fuel. Methane is a much better fuel. You can get higher i SP specific impulse basically efficiency. I mean, But for those who I think probably a lot of those who are listening to what the rock equation is, but in simple terms, it's
actually straight simple. It's like a rocket is going to go further if the gas, if it shoots the gas out of the end faster and if a bigger percentage of its mass is propellant. Was obvious. So that's what that's what the rocket equation says. So I shoot shoot gas out faster in the right direction and increase the propellant the percentage of propellant that that's going to get you allow you to go further. With methane, you can shoot it out faster, and you can make it on Mars.
You can make it on Mars for sure, exactly. So being able to do institute propellant development is production is very important. So you don't have to carry your return fuel. With your return fuel and oxygen, it's like rockets are mostly oxygen or oxidizer. So and there's there's some other subtle advantages with a oxygen methane system in that you can go to a higher percentage a higher mass ratio
of oxygen. So with kerosene you'd be about quote roughly two and a half to one oxygen to fuel mass ratio. With methane you're more like three and a half to one, and you actually want that higher mass ratio because oxygen is very dance and it's inexpensive, especially on Earth, so you're gonna you know, you have all these plants just making oxygen all day long and plank them, just make an oxygen, don't do anything. So the cost of oxygen
is basically the cost of electricity anyway. So going from falcon, going from you know, kerosene, which is basically the same as jet fuel. It's like RP one rock propelland grade. Kerosine is just a tighter grade of jet fuel. You want to go from that to something which has where the gas roots out faster, that's methane and where instatu production of propellant is easier. So that's that's why the change from from kerosene to methane. Methinks just c H four.
It's one carbon pore hydrogens and then the oxygen pairs pairs together. So here it's it's called O two because auction para bonds and I was you know all this stuff. I'm just basically help that kind.
Of the audience together large size twice to take off thrust of a saturn five, but about the same payload, but that gives you reusability much cheaper in situ propellant. It all is coherent. Uh and uh so let me ask you the thing that I think everybody wants to know, which is when when are we going to see Starship? Do a high fly to the stratosphere? When to orbit? When first payload to Mars? When the first units to Mars?
All right, well, it's all like we're obviously venturing into unknown territory. So it's not as though I have all these secret dates and I and I am, you know, just keeping them from people, but so that these are just guesses. Obviously, I'm pretty I am eighty to nine percent confident that we will reach orbit with Starship next year.
Uh.
I think probably fifty or sixty fifty percent confident that we'll be able to bring the ship and booster back. That's that's more of a dicey situation. We'll probably lose a few ships before we really get the atmospheric return and landing right. We might lose hopefully, don't you lose it. Hopefully we don't lose any boosters because that's a lot of engines. Initial booster flights will just have maybe two to four engines, not twenty eight, twenty eight a lot
of engines. So yeah, and then I think we'll probably be in do it doing high volume plates. I think probably in twenty twenty two, a couple of years from now. Well, I'm trying to make sure that our rate of innovation increases, it doesn't decrease. This is really essential. In fact, if we do not see something close to an expontential improvement in our rate of innovation, we will not reach Mars. Like a pure linear doesn't get there. Not not, well,
I'll be down anyway before it gets there. It's pure linear, it's exponential. I think we could get to Mars. We could probably send an uncrewed mission there in maybe four years. You know, there's a mass contraction every twenty six months. There's one this year, so that means in a couple of years Nail is another one, and then four years is another one. I think we've got a fighting chance of making the that second Mars transfer window.
So one thing that is really amazing about SpaceX to those of us who have experienced in the aerospace industry is the rate of innovation. Uh you know, Okay, last time you spoke to the Mars Society Convention was twenty twelve. Since then, you've made the Falcon i'm usable, introduced Falcon Heavy Crew Dragon a satellite constellation, and you're in the middle of developing Starship. So what what is your you know, what would you say is your methodology that allows you to innovate so swiftly?
I don't really know. We're focused on like scept iportant to have that have the objective you right, That's why I was talking so much about the importance of making wealth Mars, a self sustaining, pulling, self sustaining city on Mars. If that's the objective, then obviously, you know, just putting some satelli smoll good or it's not that that's not important.
You have to achieve full and rapid reusability. Emphasize quill and rapid reusability is only relevant to the degree is rapid and complete.
And uh.
And then you also have to do obital refilling. This is essential as well. And uh and then propellant production on Mars also essential. So uh, you know, and with that as the goal, then you know that that that means that that that that creates I think a good forcing function for radical innovation, because in the absence of radical innovation, we have no chance of meeting that goal.
Whereas if I go simply you know, defeat Lucked and Boeing or something like that, that that we were probably achieved it that really wasn't even a thing, you know, I wish it was. We got like they're they're not really trying to do not even trying to do reusability, which is bizarre because they make planes that are re usable.
So I mean, if they if they talked to the you know, if they talked to one of their customers buyas or a Lucky Fighter Dead or a Boeing aircraft, like, hey, we're going to sell you a seven thirty seven confused once and it's not seven thirty seven megs, but that that turns out that was a single use of a planet times but you really, uh, it would be an episode thing for them to sell a single use aircraft, but they feel quite comfortable with selling a single use
rocket and anyway, But if I always simply we're going to have be the leaders in launching the conventional satellites that exist, we would probably approach that in on a sort of a logarithmic basis where you know you'd get there, and you sort of slowly make progress towards doing ten launches a year, twelve open launches a year, and while
they do six or something like that. But since the goal is, hey, we need to make life multiplanter before it's too late and time really matters, so we're says us, it's like we're shooting for Mars, not just the moon. It's not much shoot for the moon, shoot from Mars and then and then the you know, these these competitive things are are kind of small things along the way. Unless somebody else is shooting from Mars, they will not be competitive with something as pedestrian as launching a few
satellites into Earth. Over So, how how.
Can the Mars Society help you?
Well, I do think this. In order to for there to be a self sustained city on Mars, this we're going to need an intersection of sets here. One set is the set of people that want to go and can either find sponsorship. They can either afford it themselves or find government sponsorship or take out a loan, wherever
the case may be. But somehow you've got to have the set of people who want to go to Mars and can and can come up with the funds somehow to do that, and then then you know it's I should say it's there's two sets desire to go to Mars and can afford to go to Mars. When when desire to go to the people who want to go to Mars and the people who can afford to go to Mars. When that intersection of sets reaches a million roughly, then I think we will have this city on Mars.
So we need both the motivation and the you know, we need both the means and the way. I mean we need It's like we need people to.
Want the will in the way.
The will in the way, yes, exactly the way well as will as a way, but in this case we will end away. So when the will in the way intersect, then we will have it be of all the planet species. The will in the way must intersect. So I think the Martrostic can really help with the will.
Okay, you provide the way, we'll provide the will.
Yes exactly. Okay.
Now, your assistant Jen told me earlier that you have a hard cutoff at the half hour. Is that true or do you want to stay and take some questions from the audience.
Yeah, we could do maybe five ten minutes of questions.
All right, great, so we've got one hundred questions. So would Jim, do you want to read a question or two?
Yeah, sure thing, hi Eland. My name is James Brooke. I'm from Seattle, Washington. Where's the best place to land on Mars? Do you think?
Actually, I'm not super sure. I can tell you what the criteria are that you'd want you'd want to be, but anyway, I think the short answer is mid latitudes, probably on the north so you want to be close to ice. You don't be too you don't be too far away from the sun, so you can get sol the power. And you want to land at a low altitude so that you can take maximum effect of atmosphere breaking. What do you think?
I like Milli's chasma. It's a nice little area at the bottom of Alice marineras their pressure is high.
Okay, is there a lot of ice there?
There's ice around there. We'd have to look for it though.
Okay.
That kind of brings me to my next question, and I'm going to turn it over to Carrie to ask you one. How would you prioritize like missions like two through ten. Are you going to focus on exploration or building up the infrastructure or.
Science we're gonna put I think the first order of business is build a propellant plant. I mean, we can for sure a lot out a bunch of droids. You know, that's no problem. I think why not? You know, we're going you know, and probably if anyone wants to put
their droid on, we can just take it. And you know, it's like, hey, it's basically a remote control car with sole power to remote control car, and we could provide the the communication relay, so you know, you could just basically connect to your car from your computer at home and you know, cruise your electric you could have legs to matter you're robo device slash car. That would pretty cool. And there's a lot of to be worried about, like
you know, life contamination. It's like listen, anything that can survive on Mars is very It's so freaking tough. It's insane that it is cold, and there's like a lot of UV radiation. And if it's not going to be too worried about anything, we sent it from Earth for that way. It's just tougher than anything on Earth. So but but I think the first word of business is we've got to build up propellant plant to make propellant. And this is we said, we've got to need a
lot of energy. We've got to mine some ice and we've got you got CO two from the atmosphere. So from the ice, you got the H two. Find that H two with the two got c H four oh two. But that's a lot of energy and requite hard. I think to make that repellent plan to reliable. But that's the primary order of business. And then we crols to look around and see if you can learn anything from a scientific standpoint.
Carrie, do you want to go next? Sure?
Thank you, James. I'm Carrie Fade. I live in Denver, Colorado. Thank you for joining us today, mister Musk. That we do have a lot of questions from thirteen fourteen year old so I'm just going to pick one and ask you. It's from a teenager and her name is Dara, and she wants to be an engineer and build starships and robots and her dream is working for SpaceX.
What should she focus on to be an engineer?
Well, I think this all kinds of engineering that's needed. So you don't have to be an aerospace engineer. You could be in electronics, the mechanical engineer, local engineer, it could be software engineer. I mean there's a lot of engineering basically almost any kind of engineering. We'll mean chemical engineering. I think also for figuring out how to make a good propellant depot or propellent production plan. And uh yeah, I think physics in general is a good background for thinking.
You know, I just generally recommend people take physics closest because physics has the best tools for critical thinking.
Thank you, Elon James.
Yeah, thanks Kerry. Another question, the Boring Company, now, is that just kind of an outfit to build tunneling machines that can work on Mars.
No, the Boring Company actually started as kind of a joke. And I for a lot a lot of times people would ask me, what, what do I think the opportunities are there, And for I don't know, five years or more, I kept saying, can someone please start a telling company? Because I think tunnels have a lot of opportunity for alleviating traffic in cities and just improving quality of life overall. I mean, there's a lot of streets you could turn
into parks, you certainly wouldn't need parking. You could just park cars on the ground. So and I just everyone that I was joking, and I was, and I was like, well, I guess we'll just see what it takes to drill take a tunnel. And and you know, all these like so cooled traffic experts and like haven't really made much progress. Uh, you know, studies like LA and DC or SOLIW traffic nightmare. I'm like, okay, guys, well we've got such great ideas,
when why is this little traffic nightmare? So if you built tunnels, you've got to go three D somehow, either underground or above ground, like either air or ground. And the problem with air is, like you know, any anything that can carry persons can generate a lot of noise and a lot of windforce, so and could fall in your head and also kind of not be good for privacy, and like you know, you're sitting in your backyard and something like flying over you, it's like not that cool.
So the tunnels are working all those things there are also weather proof, you know, don't have many privacy issues, and safe anyway they will leave. They would make a big difference to traffic. And we have the first production tunnel or useful tunnel in Vegas that's going to open in a month or two, So a few months, I guess, and hopefully we'll be ready for prime time around the
consumer electronic show. So and now for Mars, I think tunnels and dating in general is good, but you need to build a very light system compared to what would matters on Earth. You don't really care all that much about mass on Earth. You care a lot about masks going to Mars.
Is it fair to say that you're learning some techniques that might apply to Mars with the boring.
Comempany, Yeah, yeah, probably.
When do you think Starship will be able to be demonstrating refeeling in low eerth orbit?
I think we've got a shot at doing that in twenty two, about two years.
And then when do you guys think you'll have a moonship prototype?
Probably two or three years. As soon as you've got over refilling, you you can send significant payload to the Moon, like significant meaning one hundred tons of useful payload out of shot.
So then from there, I think you mentioned Mars is a couple of years after that.
It's only a couple years after that. Because the Mars transit window is every twenty six months, I think we maybe have a shot of standing or I send something to Mars in three years, but the windows is four years away because of the being in the different parts of this whole system.
Carrie asked a question from a young person. I'd like to also ask, do you have any tips for young people who love Mars but don't know how to help with the settlement of Mars.
Well, I think definitely, you know, anyone who is a strong advocate for Mars. I think this really makes a difference. You know, a lot of times it's not even people aren't even thinking about it, and you know, you can talk to people at a party and they or talk to friends. I like, it's just even not even a
topic of conversation. So I think it could really help if everyone out there who thinks this is important for the future of humanity and consciousness as a whole, to make it part of what people are thinking about, bringing up at parties and talking to friends and online. It's like it should be a thing that we do, and I think it's worth you know, maybe one percent of our resources at least, and that's not going to fundamentally change change things your quality of life if we have one.
If we spend one percent of our resources, you know, much less than healthcare obviously, maybe probably even less than we spend on cosmetics. Frankly, then that that would be enough to make life Palti planetary. But we really need to make this a thing people talk about it at least one percent of the time, and that that would really matter.
Like that, as we're talking about earlier, we need we need the will, which is, we need a critical mass of people wanting to make it happen, and then we need the way and Stays Basics is going to try hard to provide the way, and then once we show that there's a way, probably there'll be other companies that also try to do it as well. So we need the will in the way they can provide either. The will is extremely important. It makes a huge difference.
What's the coolest part of starship develop I'm.
Well, I guess the closet part of starship development is working with just a great team of engineers and coming up with interesting solutions. And you know, I think it's just fundamentally enjoyable. If you're working with a lot of good, smart people creatively towards solutions that have never existed before. That's very rewarding. So I guess probably like that the most.
Can you talk a little bit about how Starship could be used for other destinations in the Solar System like Venus and the outer planets.
The Starship is is definitely a general generalized ship. It basically can it's it solves for transport anywhere in the Solar System that where there is a solid surface to land. So if you can land there, we take there. We will also actually go into the atmosphere Venus for example, just like going to Orbit and uh and and perhaps to the upper atmosphere. Venus's atmosphere is extremely dense also
quite hot. So because of that dense atmosphere, you could you could have something you could have a kind of like a some sort of dirigible, you know, kind of some kind of like like things that could float on Venus that could not float on in the atmosphere because of the dense atmosphere, So you con could have been I mean, it's not a super friendly place. And then
like Mercury is super hot. I think that we could go to Sarahs or any of the asteroids, the moons of Jupiter or the quite high radiation around there, and then out to Saturn, you know, eventually getting out to uh, you know, the sort of caper belt or cloud and that kind of thing the outer Solar System. So so starship, once you have for pount depots, you can kind of like planet hop or moon hop around the Solar System.
It's not it's not a vehicle that would enable us to go interstellar, but it's that that's a that's a that's a tough one, but we need to make this the leap. We're going to another planner first. Once we are multiplanet species will create a forcing function with the rapid improvement of spaceflight, and and we'll figure out new technologies that will ultimately allow us to go to other star systems.
What do you look for in the people you hire, especially the engineers.
Really just look for evidence of exceptional ability. So it's not or at least aspirationally like sometimes these things get messed up in recruiting, or the recruiting fault of beings ends up being wrong, like sometimes wonder with Tesla, if Nikola Tesla applied to Tesla, would we even give him an interview? It's not clear. You know, this guy came from like some weird college and somewhere in eastern Europe.
He's got some odd mannerisms. Now, we don't know if we should give an interview like I worry that that's actually what we do instead of like react, it should be like, man, Nichola, this this this kid is super smart. What does he want? We'll pay him anything. That should be that that should be the reaction if Nicola Tesla applies, you know, to Tesla ironically. But so, but I can tell you the intent is we're looking for evidence of exceptional ability. Uh. And it really doesn't matter if you
want to graduate high school or college or anything. We're just looking for evidence of exceptional ability such that it would be a good predictor for doing exceptional things to SpaceX.
All right, you have some more questions from the audience the gym.
I've got one. So, have you thought about indication that works between Earth and Mars and kind of I mean you're working on starlink, what about like an Internet around Mars? Have you thought about that? Yeah?
I mean you could certainly do some variant of starlink probably would probably have to be the last question, because I've got a bunch of things to pall that. But yeah, you could just do it version of starlink around Mars and then you just need a big laser coming from Earth. Probably want it to be an orbit so it doesn't
get atmospheric diffraction or attenuation. You want to go from a big laser from Earth orbit to Mars orbit, and then you're gonna need some relay stations for when Mars is on the other side of the Sun, so you can't just shoot a laser through the Sun.
All right, Thank you, Thank you so much, Elian. We're all pulling for you. Good luck, but appreciate it.
And just like I, thank you to all the people out there that that are that are fighting hard for the course of Mars. There's not that many and we need more. Thank you, Thank you,