| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Uncle Buck" |
| Date: |
02 Oct 2005 10:16:16 PM |
| Object: |
Terraforming Mars |
Mars. I'd move there in a heartbeat if I could do it. I want to be
an adventurer, I want to explore, to pioneer new worlds.
Unfortunately, I can't. Why? Because Mars sucks. Literally. Were I
to step out of my apartment and onto a Martian landscape right now,
the air would be all sucked out of my lungs and I would die, shall we
say, "expeditiously?"
One thing I do know is that if you dug a hole into the Martian crust,
the air would get thicker and thicker the deeper you went and also at
one point, things would start getting warmer. However, I have doubts
that you could get a breathable volume of air before breaking through
the mantle (though I'm not sure - anyone care to elucidate with more
certainty?).
Talking about my vacuum balloon idea earlier gave me some thoughts
about how such a thing could be put to practical use in a place such
as Mars. For terraforming, it may sound an odd notion, but I'm
reminded of those thermal pool lids - the ones that look like bubble
wrap that help warm the water. The Martian atmosphere could be seeded
with balloons specially designed to focus heat onto the planet's
surface in a similar way. This might be achieved in a few ways:
1. "Lighter than air 'lens'" - Roughly disk-shaped and transparent,
this balloon could be designed to function in the same way a giant
magnifying glass would - by literally focusing the rays of the sun
towards Mars.
2. "Absorb/radiate" - These would be balloons made of two different
materials - one on top that is particularly efficient at absorbing
heat, and one on the bottom facing the planet that is particularly
efficient at radiating it.
If we could find two transparent materials capable of the idea in #2,
then both types of balloon could be combined for even greater
effectiveness. Add in a nice, protective UV coating and I think
you've got a real winner. ;-)
These lenses could be geostationary, acting rather like a giant
space-based "greenhouse" array, all lenses with backs to the sun and
at inclinations perpendicular to the Martian surface... Hmmmmnnn...
A sequence of them in geostationary orbit on the sun side slow-cooking
the land from the north to the south as it passes by below - I'll bet
it wouldn't take nearly as many to make a substantial difference as
one might think at first glance. It might produce "scorch belts"
around Mars while it's still going on, but we would only need the
lenses until the planet heated up enough to both support liquid water
(and thus, us) and also to begin releasing all the CO2, H2O and
whatever other gas vapors have been frozen into the Martian permafrost
for all these years. It would eventually thicken the atmosphere which
should, iiuc, accelerate the Martian thawing even further.
Even if the idea wouldn't be workable on a planetary scale, such
lenses would be practical to set up with the intention of directing
heat energy towards and around Martian colonies. Properly
constructed, the lenses could direct the sun's light directly at the
colony, allowing the light and the heat to get through while blocking
out the more harmful stuff.
A major project, to be sure. But terraforming is going to be no
simple matter. So I'm not sure what to think is "too far out" and
what isn't. :-?
Just some thoughts...
.
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Terraforming Mars |
02 Oct 2005 11:38:46 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Buck" <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote
Mars. I'd move there in a heartbeat if I could do it. I want to be
an adventurer, I want to explore, to pioneer new worlds.
Unfortunately, I can't. Why? Because Mars sucks.
Mars lacks an Earth-like magnetic field, threatening to expose
any colonists to radiation.
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/odyssey_radiation_030313.html
Mars could be colonized, but only in enclosed structures.
Domed cities that offer some protection from solar radiation
would be necessary. Ironically, this makes the colonization
of Mars more realistic, not less so.
Terraforming a planet is a huge job, with almost no precedents
to fall back on. However, building an enclosed environment is
simply building the space ship that carried the colonists on a
much larger scale. If anything, it's slightly LESS complicated
because propulsion & navigation would no longer be concerns,
and "Size" is only an indirect issue -- manufacturing &
transporting materials. If a means to produce the construction
materials on Mars itself could be found, even size would no
longer be an issue.
Step #1 would perhaps involve the construction of a Mars
orbital platform, and flying it to Mars. This station would
include landing craft.
Step #2 would be the construction of purpose-built ships
for traveling between the Earth orbital station and the
Mars orbital platform.
Step #3 would involve numerous unmanned landers stocked
with tools & supplies, sent directly from the Earth (or Earth
orbit) to the surface of Mars. Some of these landers would
also be "pods" to be used as living quarters, or even all of
them could be designed for use as living quarters once the
tools & supplies inside had been removed/exhausted.
Fuel needs would be reduced considerably by the use of
small "landers" for shuttling workers between the Mars
surface and the orbital platform. Once they arrive, they could
be rotated back to Earth on the purpose-built ships designed
exclusively for space travel, and not cargo transport. These
might not even look like "Ships" in any conventional sense,
as space-only flight negates the need for streamlining or
aerodynamics of any kind.
Step #4 would be the arrival of actual colonists. Like the
workers before them, their journey would begin on the
Earth's surface where they would be "shuttled" to Earth's
orbital space station. From there they would transfer to
one of the large purpose-built "space ships" which would
sustain them on their six month trip to the Mars orbital
platform. From the Mars platform they would transfer to
a small "shuttle" to be transported to the surface.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "SEO" |
|
| Title: Re: Terraforming Mars |
02 Oct 2005 10:55:35 PM |
|
|
Fascinating.
1. Do you think this is the right NG to post in?
2. It would take centuries.
3. It could only be funded if we stop butchering & slaughering eachother.
And if the oil doesn't run our first. Neither seems likely.
"Uncle Buck" <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote in message
news:cj51k1t8rmi5u0dk1ki0jva3rpcmgg3o7d@4ax.com...
Mars. I'd move there in a heartbeat if I could do it. I want to be
an adventurer, I want to explore, to pioneer new worlds.
Unfortunately, I can't. Why? Because Mars sucks. Literally. Were I
to step out of my apartment and onto a Martian landscape right now,
the air would be all sucked out of my lungs and I would die, shall we
say, "expeditiously?"
One thing I do know is that if you dug a hole into the Martian crust,
the air would get thicker and thicker the deeper you went and also at
one point, things would start getting warmer. However, I have doubts
that you could get a breathable volume of air before breaking through
the mantle (though I'm not sure - anyone care to elucidate with more
certainty?).
Talking about my vacuum balloon idea earlier gave me some thoughts
about how such a thing could be put to practical use in a place such
as Mars. For terraforming, it may sound an odd notion, but I'm
reminded of those thermal pool lids - the ones that look like bubble
wrap that help warm the water. The Martian atmosphere could be seeded
with balloons specially designed to focus heat onto the planet's
surface in a similar way. This might be achieved in a few ways:
1. "Lighter than air 'lens'" - Roughly disk-shaped and transparent,
this balloon could be designed to function in the same way a giant
magnifying glass would - by literally focusing the rays of the sun
towards Mars.
2. "Absorb/radiate" - These would be balloons made of two different
materials - one on top that is particularly efficient at absorbing
heat, and one on the bottom facing the planet that is particularly
efficient at radiating it.
If we could find two transparent materials capable of the idea in #2,
then both types of balloon could be combined for even greater
effectiveness. Add in a nice, protective UV coating and I think
you've got a real winner. ;-)
These lenses could be geostationary, acting rather like a giant
space-based "greenhouse" array, all lenses with backs to the sun and
at inclinations perpendicular to the Martian surface... Hmmmmnnn...
A sequence of them in geostationary orbit on the sun side slow-cooking
the land from the north to the south as it passes by below - I'll bet
it wouldn't take nearly as many to make a substantial difference as
one might think at first glance. It might produce "scorch belts"
around Mars while it's still going on, but we would only need the
lenses until the planet heated up enough to both support liquid water
(and thus, us) and also to begin releasing all the CO2, H2O and
whatever other gas vapors have been frozen into the Martian permafrost
for all these years. It would eventually thicken the atmosphere which
should, iiuc, accelerate the Martian thawing even further.
Even if the idea wouldn't be workable on a planetary scale, such
lenses would be practical to set up with the intention of directing
heat energy towards and around Martian colonies. Properly
constructed, the lenses could direct the sun's light directly at the
colony, allowing the light and the heat to get through while blocking
out the more harmful stuff.
A major project, to be sure. But terraforming is going to be no
simple matter. So I'm not sure what to think is "too far out" and
what isn't. :-?
Just some thoughts...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Terraforming Mars |
05 Oct 2005 02:33:48 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 23:16:16 -0400, Uncle Buck
<UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> wrote:
Mars. I'd move there in a heartbeat if I could do it. I want to be
an adventurer, I want to explore, to pioneer new worlds.
Unfortunately, I can't. Why? Because Mars sucks. Literally. Were I
to step out of my apartment and onto a Martian landscape right now,
the air would be all sucked out of my lungs and I would die, shall we
say, "expeditiously?"
Send all the;
politicians,
most of the clergy
all the fundies.
With all their hot air and ***** Mars would bewarmed and fertilized
in no time.
[]
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Soul food" |
|
| Title: Re: Terraforming Mars |
03 Oct 2005 02:14:53 AM |
|
|
Uncle Buck <UncleBuck@SpamMeNot.com> opined:
Mars sucks.
Not as much as neutron stars do.
------------------------------------------------
"The real dichotomy in today's world is between reason and religion.
The future of civilisation rests upon how many people realise that and do something about it."
D Silverman FLAHN, SMLAHN
AA #2208
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tim McGaughy" |
|
| Title: Re: Terraforming Mars |
03 Oct 2005 01:57:49 AM |
|
|
Uncle Buck wrote:
Mars. I'd move there in a heartbeat if I could do it. I want to be
an adventurer, I want to explore, to pioneer new worlds.
Unfortunately, I can't. Why? Because Mars sucks. Literally. Were I
to step out of my apartment and onto a Martian landscape right now,
the air would be all sucked out of my lungs and I would die, shall we
say, "expeditiously?"
One thing I do know is that if you dug a hole into the Martian crust,
the air would get thicker and thicker the deeper you went and also at
one point, things would start getting warmer. However, I have doubts
that you could get a breathable volume of air before breaking through
the mantle (though I'm not sure - anyone care to elucidate with more
certainty?).
Mars is geologically dead. It's got no active volcanoes, no evidence of
ongoing plate tectonic activity, no magnetic field to hint at a molten
interior.
It's probably 'mantle' all the way down at this point.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
