Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Terraforming nearby planets


  • Please log in to reply
93 replies to this topic

#41 Moontanman

Moontanman

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 8,281 posts
  • LocationSouth Eastern North Carolina

Posted 30 May 2012 - 08:54 PM

No one in particular. I just see it as a waste of available resources when there are people starving to death now. It would be nice to terraform other planets or moons as stepping stones away from Earth. I just don't see it as an affordable option right now or the near future. Then again, I don't understand why the fanciest, most glamorous building in the ghetto is usually the church, built with money taken from the poor and wasted on a place for the poor to worship while they starve.

It would seem to me that we could apply our efforts to advance technology to take care of mankind's needs before we pursue mankind's wants. I was simply pointing out my opinion on this priority.



I am not sure I can agree with this, while I think Terra forming is probably not going to happen for many reasons the continued exploration and eventual exploitation of the solar system beyond the earth is going to pay off for everyone in the long term. New technologies, raw materials maybe manufactured goods as well. If we can build colony type artificial habitats orbiting the sun and utilizing the solar system as raw materials I can see reason to continue space travel, bringing things to the earth is much easier than taking them away.

The old invocation of the poor to make the statement that one doesn't value something or other. Noted.



If we just gave up warfare we could do both at the same time...
  • 0
Life is the poetry of the Universe
Love is the poetry of life

You do not possess belief, belief possesses you...

I'm always open to new ideas, I just don't let them crawl into my skull and take a dump... 

“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but illusion of knowledge.” — Stephen Hawking

"In every country and in every age the priest has been hostile to liberty; he is always in allegiance to the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection of his own." ~ thomas jefferson

Check out my YouTube channel here.



If I was helpful, let me know by clicking the [+] sign ->

#42 doG

doG

    Protist

  • Senior Members
  • 2,051 posts
  • Location33.78N 84.66W

Posted 30 May 2012 - 09:00 PM

...the continued exploration and eventual exploitation of the solar system beyond the earth is going to pay off for everyone in the long term...

If we just gave up warfare we could do both at the same time...

I do agree with that but space exploration and exploitation is not the resource animal that terraforming is. I wholeheartedly support space exploration and research to the extent we can afford it.

Yes, the resources spent on war are really a waste without a proportionate reward. We do lose a despot here and there but the expense is tremendous.
  • 0

doG

-- Science is about facts regardless of belief, Religion is about belief, regardless of the facts. --
-- If atheism is a religion, then "bald" is a hair color. --

-- The dyslexic agnostic insomniac atheist stays up at night wondering if there is a doG. --


#43 the asinine cretin

the asinine cretin

    Atom

  • Senior Members
  • 279 posts
  • LocationUranus

Posted 30 May 2012 - 09:02 PM

If we just gave up warfare we could do both at the same time...

Now we're talking.
  • 0
video removed by staff

#44 Moontanman

Moontanman

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 8,281 posts
  • LocationSouth Eastern North Carolina

Posted 30 May 2012 - 09:34 PM

I do agree with that but space exploration and exploitation is not the resource animal that terraforming is.



I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "Resource Animal" No resources will ever be transferred to the Earth From Mars, no significant number of people will ever be taken there. Please elaborate.
  • 0
Life is the poetry of the Universe
Love is the poetry of life

You do not possess belief, belief possesses you...

I'm always open to new ideas, I just don't let them crawl into my skull and take a dump... 

“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but illusion of knowledge.” — Stephen Hawking

"In every country and in every age the priest has been hostile to liberty; he is always in allegiance to the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection of his own." ~ thomas jefferson

Check out my YouTube channel here.



If I was helpful, let me know by clicking the [+] sign ->

#45 doG

doG

    Protist

  • Senior Members
  • 2,051 posts
  • Location33.78N 84.66W

Posted 30 May 2012 - 09:50 PM

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "Resource Animal" No resources will ever be transferred to the Earth From Mars, no significant number of people will ever be taken there. Please elaborate.

IMO, as an example, it would cost far more to terraform Mars than to simply explore Mars. I used 'resource animal' as a figure of speech for exorbitant cost.
  • 0

doG

-- Science is about facts regardless of belief, Religion is about belief, regardless of the facts. --
-- If atheism is a religion, then "bald" is a hair color. --

-- The dyslexic agnostic insomniac atheist stays up at night wondering if there is a doG. --


#46 space noob

space noob

    Meson

  • Senior Members
  • 86 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 30 May 2012 - 09:58 PM

I think creating stations on asteroids like Apophis would be beneficial to science and space exploration
  • 0

#47 pantheory

pantheory

    Protist

  • Senior Members
  • 804 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 1 June 2012 - 12:00 AM

Another idea I was thinking of for my alien character was that she is part of a new species created in a special laboratory, through the splicing of humans and another animal, so that whatever happens to us our genes will be carried on through them.

They would need a planet to live on near Earth, so I was thinking Mars, because Mars would be easier to work with than Venus.

How would we be able to terraform Mars, and when would we be able to do so?

I was thinking that we could use a device to heat up the surface of Mars, melting the CO2 below the surface, freeing it back into the atmosphere, causing a greenhouse effect to get more heat from the sun, melting the Martian ice, thus creating oceans. The only problem I've encountered now is restoring Mars' magnetic field.

Mars is one of the primary transforming possibilities within maybe a thousand years minimum. But I think the moon would be easier. The moon is the right distance from the sun and could be "spun up" as part of the terraforming process. Even though it probably has underground water, we probably would need to import much more from the outer moons or the asteroid belt. We probably could import an atmosphere of nitrogen, oxygen, and Co2 in the form of ices with sun shades needed as such ices are imported, also probably from the asteroid belt. My expectation would be that once there is an atmosphere, and a moon-spin fast enough, a magnetic field would almost immediately develop to shield from UV and other deleterious solar radiation. Without direct solar wind, I believe this atmosphere might last maybe thousands of years before needing to be replenished. Manufacturing processing could also produce a regular replenishment of these same molecular gasses.

As far as genetic alterations, I would expect that we would engineer both plant and animal life primarily for food purposes to start with, to be better adapted to live in a foreign environment. I would also expect Mars to immediately develop a magnetic field also once it has a substantial atmosphere.

Here's a couple of links that might give a clue concerning the possibility that our present model of Earth and Planetary magnetism may be wrong.

http://www.nature.co...ll/485319a.html

http://www.scienceda...20531102443.htm

Venus, I believe, will also eventually be terraformed but I think not in the foreseeable future. I think vast asteroid, space (solar system) colonies, and other planetary moon colonies will come first because they would be easier, cheaper, and more profitable in the foreseeable future.
//

Edited by pantheory, 1 June 2012 - 12:14 AM.

  • 0

#48 Moontanman

Moontanman

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 8,281 posts
  • LocationSouth Eastern North Carolina

Posted 1 June 2012 - 02:02 AM

Mars is one of the primary transforming possibilities within maybe a thousand years minimum. But I think the moon would be easier. The moon is the right distance from the sun and could be "spun up" as part of the terraforming process. Even though it probably has underground water, we probably would need to import much more from the outer moons or the asteroid belt. We probably could import an atmosphere of nitrogen, oxygen, and Co2 in the form of ices with sun shades needed as such ices are imported, also probably from the asteroid belt. My expectation would be that once there is an atmosphere, and a moon-spin fast enough, a magnetic field would almost immediately develop to shield from UV and other deleterious solar radiation. Without direct solar wind, I believe this atmosphere might last maybe thousands of years before needing to be replenished. Manufacturing processing could also produce a regular replenishment of these same molecular gasses.

As far as genetic alterations, I would expect that we would engineer both plant and animal life primarily for food purposes to start with, to be better adapted to live in a foreign environment. I would also expect Mars to immediately develop a magnetic field also once it has a substantial atmosphere.

Here's a couple of links that might give a clue concerning the possibility that our present model of Earth and Planetary magnetism may be wrong.

http://www.nature.co...ll/485319a.html

http://www.scienceda...20531102443.htm

Venus, I believe, will also eventually be terraformed but I think not in the foreseeable future. I think vast asteroid, space (solar system) colonies, and other planetary moon colonies will come first because they would be easier, cheaper, and more profitable in the foreseeable future.
//



pantheory, i see nothing in either of those links to support this assertion (sentence in bold)

Edited by Moontanman, 1 June 2012 - 02:02 AM.

  • 0
Life is the poetry of the Universe
Love is the poetry of life

You do not possess belief, belief possesses you...

I'm always open to new ideas, I just don't let them crawl into my skull and take a dump... 

“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but illusion of knowledge.” — Stephen Hawking

"In every country and in every age the priest has been hostile to liberty; he is always in allegiance to the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection of his own." ~ thomas jefferson

Check out my YouTube channel here.



If I was helpful, let me know by clicking the [+] sign ->

#49 pantheory

pantheory

    Protist

  • Senior Members
  • 804 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 1 June 2012 - 08:39 AM

Moontanman,

I see nothing in either of those links to support this assertion.

(your quote)

I would also expect Mars to immediately develop a magnetic field once it has a substantial atmosphere . (This would also apply to the moon concerning both an atmosphere and an adequate rotation period)

(parenthesis added, my quote and expectation)

Tis true my friend. That's why I said "I would expect :) (not I assert)," since it is my opinion and expectation based upon contradictions of present theory, whereby all could come to their own conclusions, which is what it seems that you have done :)

I realize that I am getting close to your field of expertise concerning moon tans so I tread lightly :)

Edited by pantheory, 1 June 2012 - 08:48 AM.

  • 0

#50 Moontanman

Moontanman

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 8,281 posts
  • LocationSouth Eastern North Carolina

Posted 1 June 2012 - 01:22 PM

Moontanman,

(your quote)

(parenthesis added, my quote and expectation)

Tis true my friend. That's why I said "I would expect :) (not I assert)," since it is my opinion and expectation based upon contradictions of present theory, whereby all could come to their own conclusions, which is what it seems that you have done :)

I realize that I am getting close to your field of expertise concerning moon tans so I tread lightly :)



Come on dude, I know when something is above my pay grade, that's why i asked, you suggested that Mars would form a magnetic field if it had an denser atmosphere then you gave links but the links didn't support your opinion at all, in fact never mentioned it. Why would you expect mars to generate a magnetic field if it had a substantial atmosphere?

I could see how spinning the moon, if it still has a molten core might generate a magnetic field, but why would mars?

Edited by Moontanman, 1 June 2012 - 01:23 PM.

  • 0
Life is the poetry of the Universe
Love is the poetry of life

You do not possess belief, belief possesses you...

I'm always open to new ideas, I just don't let them crawl into my skull and take a dump... 

“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but illusion of knowledge.” — Stephen Hawking

"In every country and in every age the priest has been hostile to liberty; he is always in allegiance to the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection of his own." ~ thomas jefferson

Check out my YouTube channel here.



If I was helpful, let me know by clicking the [+] sign ->

#51 TransformerRobot

TransformerRobot

    Molecule

  • Senior Members
  • 521 posts
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 1 June 2012 - 01:59 PM

Mars is one of the primary transforming possibilities within maybe a thousand years minimum. But I think the moon would be easier. The moon is the right distance from the sun and could be "spun up" as part of the terraforming process. Even though it probably has underground water, we probably would need to import much more from the outer moons or the asteroid belt. We probably could import an atmosphere of nitrogen, oxygen, and Co2 in the form of ices with sun shades needed as such ices are imported, also probably from the asteroid belt. My expectation would be that once there is an atmosphere, and a moon-spin fast enough, a magnetic field would almost immediately develop to shield from UV and other deleterious solar radiation. Without direct solar wind, I believe this atmosphere might last maybe thousands of years before needing to be replenished. Manufacturing processing could also produce a regular replenishment of these same molecular gasses.

As far as genetic alterations, I would expect that we would engineer both plant and animal life primarily for food purposes to start with, to be better adapted to live in a foreign environment. I would also expect Mars to immediately develop a magnetic field also once it has a substantial atmosphere.

Here's a couple of links that might give a clue concerning the possibility that our present model of Earth and Planetary magnetism may be wrong.

http://www.nature.co...ll/485319a.html

http://www.scienceda...20531102443.htm

Venus, I believe, will also eventually be terraformed but I think not in the foreseeable future. I think vast asteroid, space (solar system) colonies, and other planetary moon colonies will come first because they would be easier, cheaper, and more profitable in the foreseeable future.
//


Yes, perhaps the moon would be easier than Mars or Venus.

Also, are you saying that even if people were planning to live on a terraformed Mars, they would have to be genetically altered to better suit it's atmosphere and climate?
  • 0

#52 pantheory

pantheory

    Protist

  • Senior Members
  • 804 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 1 June 2012 - 06:27 PM

Come on dude, I know when something is above my pay grade, that's why i asked, you suggested that Mars would form a magnetic field if it had an denser atmosphere then you gave links but the links didn't support your opinion at all, in fact never mentioned it. Why would you expect mars to generate a magnetic field if it had a substantial atmosphere?

I could see how spinning the moon, if it still has a molten core might generate a magnetic field, but why would mars?

The first link discussed their findings that the Earth's core appears to be non-conductive. If true the dynamo effect would not be the cause of the Earth's magnetic field or influence the extent of its strength.

The second link explains that the moon reacts differently to the solar wind than what theory had predicted.

The bottom line to me is that our Theories of planetary magnetism are simply wrong. My expectation is that planetary magnetism has two causes and influences; neither are accordingly related to the core of the planet or moon. The primary cause, I expect, is the relative motion of a relatively dense atmosphere with a liquid and/or solid surface. This causes ionization of the atmosphere and electrical currents through its fluids in the opposite direction of its rotation. The magnetic field would accordingly be created perpendicular to the atmospheric wind for most planets. The second cause of planetary magnetism would be the charged particles from the solar wind that could strengthen a pre-existing magnetic field.

The Earth has these condition but Venus' rotation is too slow. Mars' atmosphere is too thin and when it flows in strength and volume (the wind) it is seasonally moving south-north, north-south (primarily water and CO2). The result is a very small east-west magnetic field.

The outer planets have a thick atmosphere and thought to have liquid interiors/ surfaces. Being farther from the sun there would be less strengthening of a pre-existing magnetic field by the solar wind. Mercury has a weak magnetic field accordingly due to a miniscule atmosphere and relatively little spin rate. The solar wind there, however, is very strong and may be the only cause of its weak magnetic field. Titan, on the other hand, has a substantial atmosphere, liquid on its surface, but a slow spin rate, about 16 Earth days. It also experiences mush less solar wind per volume of its atmosphere. The result is that it also has only a very weak magnetic field.

Magnetic fields could accordingly reverse upon a great solar storm which would overload the atmosphere with an influx of positive ions. The 'Earth's magnetic field is half way between its spin access and its incline to the solar system plane.

Of course this is only theory, and not the present mainstream dynamo model of planetary magnetism, which I believe has been contradicted :huh: by observations of most planets.
//

TransformerRobot,

Yes, perhaps the moon would be easier than Mars or Venus.


Also, are you saying that even if people were planning to live on a terraformed Mars, they would have to be genetically altered to better suit it's atmosphere and climate?

No, only the plants and animals I think would need modification. I would expect some day there would be a difference in the physical characteristics between native born Martians and Earthlings. Earthlings, for one thing, would probably be stronger because of its gravity, resulting in native born Martians not doing as well physically on Earth.
//

Edited by pantheory, 1 June 2012 - 06:27 PM.

  • 0

#53 TransformerRobot

TransformerRobot

    Molecule

  • Senior Members
  • 521 posts
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 1 June 2012 - 08:29 PM

No, only the plants and animals I think would need modification. I would expect some day there would be a difference in the physical characteristics between native born Martians and Earthlings. Earthlings, for one thing, would probably be stronger because of its gravity, resulting in native born Martians not doing as well physically on Earth.


So if we would be stronger or faster physically if we were somewhere with weaker gravity?
  • 0

#54 pantheory

pantheory

    Protist

  • Senior Members
  • 804 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 1 June 2012 - 08:52 PM

Earthlings would be stronger and faster than people that were born and lived on Mars, without their extra exercise and aerobics such as running with weights fastened to them.

Muscle deterioration happens even faster in space. Some astronauts and cosmonauts have found it difficult to walk and function when first coming back after spending some time in space.

Geriatric daily living, for instance, would be much easier on the moon and broken hips from falling would be uncommon. After maybe a year on the moon without substantial regular exercise, a person in a moon nursing home might not be able to ever walk again on Earth if they ever came back here.
//

Edited by pantheory, 1 June 2012 - 08:56 PM.

  • 0

#55 TransformerRobot

TransformerRobot

    Molecule

  • Senior Members
  • 521 posts
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 1 June 2012 - 09:07 PM

So if someone was born on a planet three times as big as Earth, they would grow up to develop stronger muscles?
  • 0

#56 pantheory

pantheory

    Protist

  • Senior Members
  • 804 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 1 June 2012 - 10:58 PM

So if someone was born on a planet three times as big as Earth, they would grow up to develop stronger muscles?

I don't know about a planet three times larger, there would be a limit how big a planet could be for human genetics to continue to function properly. But a larger planet in general, if we were eventually able to function, would seemingly produce bigger muscles. Could we live longer (rhetorical)? We probably would live for a shorter period of time with increased gravity. Could we live longer on a planet with a little less gravity than Earth (rhetorical)? Maybe some people would :)
//

Edited by pantheory, 1 June 2012 - 10:58 PM.

  • 0

#57 TransformerRobot

TransformerRobot

    Molecule

  • Senior Members
  • 521 posts
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 2 June 2012 - 02:54 AM

I don't know about a planet three times larger, there would be a limit how big a planet could be for human genetics to continue to function properly. But a larger planet in general, if we were eventually able to function, would seemingly produce bigger muscles. Could we live longer (rhetorical)? We probably would live for a shorter period of time with increased gravity. Could we live longer on a planet with a little less gravity than Earth (rhetorical)? Maybe some people would :)


Then would there be a way for inhabitants of a planet with higher gravity to live longer? Maybe give them stronger bone systems?
  • 0

#58 pantheory

pantheory

    Protist

  • Senior Members
  • 804 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 2 June 2012 - 03:30 AM

Then would there be a way for inhabitants of a planet with higher gravity to live longer? Maybe give them stronger bone systems?

Human inhabitants could be genetically selected for muscularity and longevity traits. In a few hundred generations a better adapted breed of humans could be created. In the future we probably will also be able to identify which genes are most suitable for a particular environment and build a new human genetically without going through intermediate steps :).
//

Edited by pantheory, 2 June 2012 - 03:30 AM.

  • 0

#59 TransformerRobot

TransformerRobot

    Molecule

  • Senior Members
  • 521 posts
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 4 June 2012 - 03:33 AM

This is a little embarrassing, but here's something that recaps what we discussed earlier.

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=PrvhOepio4Q

With what he said in mind, nuclear power plants could be a way to melt the CO2 on Mars to help it's atmosphere, but sending materials to build the plant via spaceship? It sounds rather dangerous, so what precautions would we have to take so that the ship doesn't explode and release radiation into our atmosphere? Lead shielding I think would only keep radiation from making people sick, and it might not be enough to simply keep the fuel line from leaking.

Edited by TransformerRobot, 4 June 2012 - 03:37 AM.

  • 0

#60 the asinine cretin

the asinine cretin

    Atom

  • Senior Members
  • 279 posts
  • LocationUranus

Posted 4 June 2012 - 03:53 AM

This is a little embarrassing

No need for embarrassment, mate. Thanks for sharing. I love this topic.
  • 0
video removed by staff




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users