Thread: Increasing the overall size of the Planet Mars

Reading about Terra forming the Planet Mars and the long term process involved and then reading that the entire process will be for not in the end as the planets size will eventually allow for the atmosphere to return to it's current form do to a lack of gravitational forces required to keep the atmosphere in place.

Even though this seems far fetched in our day and age of science, could not asteroids from the asteroid belt be redirected to impact on to the surface of the Planet mars to increase the over all size of the planet also adding to it's gravitational field allowing the planet to keep it's new atmosphere in place?

This could also have long term effects for a a safer Galaxy where asteroids would not be bumping into each other causing these giant rock formations to drift out into space or colliding with other planets in our solar system.

Of course it would cost way to much to even consider possible in our day and age but for future generations this maybe something that can and will be done.

Just my two cents on the entire conceptual idea of Terra Forming the planet Mars.

It would require an enormous number of asteroids, as well as a lot of technology to do it.

If humans were to add a new atmosphere to Mars, the existing gravity would be sufficient to hold it for more millions of years than creates a problem. A lot of small planets and moons have significant atmospheres and hold onto them.

Originally Posted by Fluid space

Reading about Terra forming the Planet Mars and the long term process involved and then reading that the entire process will be for not in the end as the planets size will eventually allow for the atmosphere to return to it's current form do to a lack of gravitational forces required to keep the atmosphere in place.

Even though this seems far fetched in our day and age of science, could not asteroids from the asteroid belt be redirected to impact on to the surface of the Planet mars to increase the over all size of the planet also adding to it's gravitational field allowing the planet to keep it's new atmosphere in place?

The total estimated mass of the asteroid belt is only about 4% of that of our own Moon, or just about 0.5% of that of Mars. In other words, even adding all of the asteroid belt to Mars would not make a significant difference in it's mass

This could also have long term effects for a a safer Galaxy where asteroids would not be bumping into each other causing these giant rock formations to drift out into space or colliding with other planets in our solar system.

It's a common misconception that the asteroid belt is thickly strewn with bodies. It is nothing like you see represented in popular culture. You could pass right through it and most likely not even see an asteroid.

Mars’ surface area is about equal to the land area of Earth. So if we spent a thousand years terraforming Mars we could arguably support another 6 billion people. However, if we deconstructed Mars and used the material to build Space Habitats, then we could arguably support over a hundred thousand times the Earth’s population.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernal_sphere
Of course, we’ll deconstruct the asteroids and comets first (solving the other problem), but sooner or later Mars will just be one big Lowe’s hardware store.

An idea would be to put Ceres in a close orbit to Mars and edge it in to the point where it breaks up and rains down on Mars. Not just for the mass but Ceres has more fresh water than Earth does. If we could arrange it so that a fair amount of it lands at one of the poles, the ice would stay as ice, so be usable for a long time into the future. What water ice spread elsewhere may eventually melt and help warm Mars up a little.

Pictures of Mars make it look as desolate and barren as the Moon. I don't know that we would ever want to live there. A hollowed out asteroid may be just as well, and it can be propelled about by rockets.

Originally Posted by Cyberia

... the ice would stay as ice

Wouldn't the ice would most likely vaporize in the atmosphere reentry even though mars has a thinner atmosphere overall?

What gets me is why anyone even suggests an increase in mass. Even though Mars today has a thin atmosphere, its gravity is quite sufficient to hold on to an Earth thickness atmosphere for perhaps a billion years.

People would soon adapt to Mars gravity, especially with the help of a bit of genetic manipulation.

Why go to the incredible extra task of adding mass, which would takes hundreds of years and cost trillions of dollars? For no purpose?

Adding water and atmosphere makes sense, but not mass for gravity sake.

Originally Posted by skeptic

What gets me is why anyone even suggests an increase in mass. Even though Mars today has a thin atmosphere, its gravity is quite sufficient to hold on to an Earth thickness atmosphere for perhaps a billion years.

This might be true if it were not for the solar wind and the absence of a magnetic field. The current estimate is that it would lose an atmosphere of similar density to the Earth in 50,000 years.

Ophiolite

That is strange since there was an item in New Scientist that said an Earth density atmosphere on our moon would last a million years.

Originally Posted by Paleoichneum

Originally Posted by Cyberia

... the ice would stay as ice

Wouldn't the ice would most likely vaporize in the atmosphere reentry even though mars has a thinner atmosphere overall?

Certainly some of it would though the chunks of ice would be very large and initially the temperature of space. However the water vapour would still reach the surface, even if as rain, or more likely, snow.