Timeline for Protecting Mars with no magnetosphere: Can genetic engineering help?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
29 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Jan 27, 2021 at 2:45 | history | bounty ended | Seraphim | ||
| S Jan 27, 2021 at 2:45 | history | notice removed | Seraphim | ||
| Jan 22, 2021 at 18:44 | comment | added | Seraphim | @ChristopherJamesHuff He isn't the only on to suggest such things, projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/colonysite.php. | |
| Jan 22, 2021 at 18:11 | comment | added | Christopher James Huff | Suggesting that Venus is a better terraforming target than Mars shows a profound misunderstanding of the scale of the problem. When trying to estimate how many times harder Venus would be to terraform, the question is not what the first digit would be, but how many zeros to put on the end. Nobody who suggests such a thing has the slightest idea what they're talking about, and there is no need to waste any more of my time on their videos. | |
| Jan 22, 2021 at 16:55 | comment | added | Seraphim | @ChristopherJamesHuff Misconceptions? Could say a few. If I have been given inaccurate info I would like to know. And maybe the misconception's you've heard may be due to a lack of context. | |
| Jan 22, 2021 at 15:12 | comment | added | Christopher James Huff | I know who Isaac Arthur is. I've run into other people with bizarre misconceptions based on his videos. No, I'm not going to watch his videos. | |
| Jan 22, 2021 at 11:45 | answer | added | Dexyan | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jan 22, 2021 at 4:01 | comment | added | Seraphim | I know. What helps Venus helps Mars. And as for the YouTube videos, yea, the majority of such videos are not at all good. I admit, I'm not a mathematician but after I found the videos I did do a background check on who was running the show, here is the wiki link if your interested en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Arthur. Anyhow, this has derailed a bit, this question is about Mars, not Venus:)! | |
| Jan 22, 2021 at 1:31 | comment | added | Christopher James Huff | It is not a matter of perspective, but one of physics. It's not one of technology either: just about anything that helps dealing with the issues on Venus will also help with Mars. And in general, I don't recommend any YouTube videos as sources for this kind of information. At least check the information with other sources, or run some numbers to validate things like the claims you repeated about changing Venus' rotation. Certainly don't say "here, watch hours of this guy's videos" when someone points out that something makes no physical or logical sense. | |
| Jan 22, 2021 at 0:05 | comment | added | Seraphim | @ChristopherJamesHuff Well I guess its a matter of perspective. The terraforming projects occurs in the future so what is feasible now and in the future will be very different. There are issues with the methods I described yes but I don't of the word count to go into depth on the actual process I imagine. If you're wondering how I came to such ideas in the first place than I really do recommend the videos I listed before hand. If nothing else than to explain what they did wrong and propose a better source of terraforming info. Though conversation is not leading to the question at hand! | |
| Jan 21, 2021 at 21:34 | comment | added | Christopher James Huff | You want the hydrogen to bind up excess oxygen, and the hydrogen in Oort cloud objects is already bound up with oxygen, plus you're adding even more nitrogen...that's really just making things worse. It also has energetic issues...in short, Venus isn't going to be cooling off any while you're doing it, and you may be waiting a while for it to have a stable solid surface again. And you could give Mars deep oceans and a dense atmosphere with a fraction of the impactors in far less time, without having to resort to performing star-lifting operations on the sun. | |
| Jan 21, 2021 at 19:47 | comment | added | Seraphim | @ChristopherJamesHuff Rotation can be solved by strategic bombardment of comets from the Oort cloud or outer system to speed up rotation. This also provides hydrogen though considering stellar lifting is a thing in this setting and shipments of the suns mass, either in cargo hold of some kind or with a particle beam bouncing of magnetic satellites, a hydrogen beam can be aimed at Venus. Shading would be needed at the beginning to cool Venus and extract the extra atmosphere, but after wards Venus could be stable enough to allow the removal of the shading. This is optional of course. | |
| Jan 21, 2021 at 18:40 | comment | added | Christopher James Huff | @Seraphim I don't. The facts are that Venus needs drastically more severe atmospheric alternation, importation of enormous amounts of hydrogen, and either changes to its rotation that are simply impossible to achieve with anything resembling current technology, or orbital megastructures to shade and reflect sunlight that are only a little more plausible. Terraforming Mars is something close enough to our current capabilities that we can seriously think about it, but terraforming Venus is completely beyond us. | |
| Jan 21, 2021 at 17:19 | comment | added | Seraphim | @ChristopherJamesHuff I recommend watching the videos "Spring time on Mars", "Winter on Venus", "Terraforming techniques", "Colonizing Venus", "Colonizing Mars" by Isaac Arthur on YouTube. | |
| Jan 21, 2021 at 14:47 | comment | added | Christopher James Huff | @Seraphim Per the edit: your characterization of Venus as a better terraforming candidate is...dubious. Turning Mars into a garden paradise would be a good side project to do while you're trying to make Venus barely habitable. And in any case, there's little biology can do other than develop a technological civilization to obtain replacement atmosphere from off-world, and atmospheric loss is slow enough that you could conceivably evolve a new intelligent form of life to build that civilization (mammals have existed for less than 200 million years). | |
| S Jan 20, 2021 at 21:12 | history | bounty started | Seraphim | ||
| S Jan 20, 2021 at 21:12 | history | notice added | Seraphim | Improve details | |
| Jan 20, 2021 at 7:19 | history | edited | Seraphim | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2761 characters in body
|
| Jan 18, 2021 at 22:40 | comment | added | DKNguyen | @ChristopherJamesHuff Hmmm. I see. | |
| Jan 18, 2021 at 17:01 | comment | added | Christopher James Huff | @DKNguyen an atmosphere will block radiation, especially if you pile up enough to have ~1 atm of surface pressure in Mars gravity. Even the existing atmosphere provides a lot of shielding: jpl.nasa.gov/images/estimated-radiation-dosage-on-mars | |
| Jan 18, 2021 at 16:05 | comment | added | DKNguyen | You seem to be thinking that the only effect of no magnetosphere is that the solar wind blows the atmosphere away. You seem to be forgetting that the solar wind itself is dangerous and is full of radiation. | |
| Jan 18, 2021 at 6:15 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Jan 18, 2021 at 0:44 | answer | added | Willk | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jan 17, 2021 at 23:57 | answer | added | r3dapple | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jan 17, 2021 at 23:23 | comment | added | Christopher James Huff | As MolbOrg points out, atmospheric loss is something to be concerned about on geological timescales. Also, an atmosphere with the same surface pressure as Earth's will be far deeper than Earth's, making it a very effective radiation shield. Mars just doesn't need a magnetic field. Your "garden world" Venus is in trouble though, since even if you somehow deal with its hellish atmosphere, it'll be reliant on some form of orbital shades and artificial light/heat sources to make it habitable. As support systems fail, it's going to start roasting each 2-month day and freezing each 2-month night. | |
| Jan 17, 2021 at 23:23 | comment | added | AlexP | It's a non-problem. The lack of a magnetic field leads to the loss of atmosphere over geological time. Not an issue on human time-scales, not even an issue on historical time-scales. There are only 15,000 years between the invention of agriculture and our present day... and at least one million years is needed for the loss of atmosphere to become measurable. | |
| Jan 17, 2021 at 23:21 | history | edited | Mary | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
spelling and punctuation
|
| Jan 17, 2021 at 22:58 | comment | added | MolbOrg | u do your numbers Mars presently loses about 100 grams (a quarter of a pound) of atmosphere every second, which is about 3000t per year. would say that the number will not depend that much on the density of air at the surface, but one can multiply it by a 100, current atmosphere mass about 2.5e13t, soo if pressure on the surface would be 100kpa, to lose 1 percent of it it will take about 100 million years. plenty of time to die out or crawl back to the technology and space age. | |
| Jan 17, 2021 at 22:14 | history | asked | Seraphim | CC BY-SA 4.0 |