Notices
Results 1 to 28 of 28
Like Tree3Likes
  • 1 Post By Neverfly
  • 1 Post By kojax
  • 1 Post By Neverfly

Thread: Reviving the Mars?

  1. #1 Reviving the Mars? 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    3
    Uhm, i saw a post on facebook what would mars be, if it had water and atmosphere, then there was a picture of "earth like" planet...

    Then i said to myself, what a beautiful planet if it really were alive, not corrupted by humans...
    Then i ask my self, can we really revive mars?

    here's my suggestions:
    We all knew that Earth was VERY lucky, that at the stage of it's heating up, there was an asteroid containing frozen carbon i think? correct me if i'm wrong, that struck the earth evaporating those frozen things making an atmosphere and of course, rain. That's the story behind the Earth and it's beautiful Structure that was destroyed by humans...

    Why not apply this thing to the mars? somehow in the future, Space Exploration will be leveled up, having more advanced technologies, computer power doubles every month right? So then, when we feel like we can do it, Just do it! -Nike... Just send an Asteroid with frozen gas targeted to the polar ice caps, the heat of the explosion will melt the ice creating an atmosphere...

    OR

    Give some Greenhouse Gas Dosage... The gas that slowly kills the earth could help! trapping the heat from the mars, the temperature will slowly rise over time, slowly melting the ice from the poles and creating an atmosphere...

    OR

    The Bad once, Nuclear powerplants...


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    Then i ask my self, can we really revive mars?
    No we can't with todays technology and even with advances in terraforming it would be thousands of years before Mars would be "habitable" by humans.


    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by daggerwrist View Post
    Then i said to myself, what a beautiful planet if it really were alive, not corrupted by humans...
    Then i ask my self, can we really revive mars?
    So we can corrupt it?
    Quote Originally Posted by daggerwrist View Post
    We all knew that Earth was VERY lucky, that at the stage of it's heating up, there was an asteroid containing frozen carbon i think? correct me if i'm wrong, that struck the earth evaporating those frozen things making an atmosphere and of course, rain.
    The early solar system did not have the orbital stability we enjoy today. All of the planets were bombarded in the past. Cometary impacts were almost common. There's strong evidence that Earth, Venus and Mars all had water. And Mercury is looking interesting. Then we look at Europa, a small moon, which is more abundant in water than the Earth is, by far. I wouldn't say Earth was "lucky." In fact, one could argue there is way too much water. It's just the way it worked out and after many billion years, to those of us that developed on this planet, this planet appears to have been lucky because we're so well suited to it. A creature from a methane planet might consider the Earth to be Hell.
    Quote Originally Posted by daggerwrist View Post
    That's the story behind the Earth and it's beautiful Structure that was destroyed by humans...
    The Earth is not destroyed. Not by a long shot. Now, I do agree that humans have disrupted the environment that we are familiar with and that this disruption has consequences for us, but that doesn't mean the Earth is by any means 'destroyed.' It's been through far, far worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by daggerwrist View Post
    Why not apply this thing to the mars? somehow in the future, Space Exploration will be leveled up, having more advanced technologies,
    As long as we keep pursuing it...
    Quote Originally Posted by daggerwrist View Post
    computer power doubles every month right?
    No, not even close.
    Quote Originally Posted by daggerwrist View Post
    So then, when we feel like we can do it, Just do it! -Nike... Just send an Asteroid with frozen gas targeted to the polar ice caps, the heat of the explosion will melt the ice creating an atmosphere...

    OR

    Give some Greenhouse Gas Dosage... The gas that slowly kills the earth could help! trapping the heat from the mars, the temperature will slowly rise over time, slowly melting the ice from the poles and creating an atmosphere...

    OR

    The Bad once, Nuclear powerplants...
    How will Nuclear power plants terraform, other than providing energy to run terraforming machinery?

    Either way, it's not so easy. There's a great deal more involved than just shuffling asteroids around like cosmic billiards. And moving planetary scale gasses around is no small feat.
    I'm more a fan of Venus, than Mars. It's very close to the size of the Earth, closer to the Sun and already has an atmosphere and many base elements. Even with those headstarts, terraforming Venus is not a project for the next few hundred years, but the next few thousand.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    317
    The fantasies surrounding Mars go on and on. The chances of humans living on Mars is almost zero. It is tough enough living on Earth.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Your great-great-great-grandchildren will have a good laugh at that one.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    I'm in the same attitude as Neverfly about this. Venus is a better prospect than Mars.

    On Mars you'll always have to deal with the low gravity, no matter how well we terraform it. That means any human inhabitants will be losing bone mass, unless we find a medical treatment of some kind that can prevent it.

    On the other hand, Venus has .9 the Earth's mass, so very close in gravity. Even if the first colony was just zeppelin ships floating in the high atmosphere, and we never actually ventured to the surface, Venus would have more to offer.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Kerling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    440
    Mars is (in contrary to Venus) in the habitabal zone. Yet it is rather light. This is unbeneficial. Whereas for venus we'd need to cool it down by reducing the greenhouse effect. On Mars, this is very hard to impossible as it is not able to hold a 'natural' atmosphere. Yet, engineering (heavy) greenhouse gases isn't at all that difficult.

    It is very feasable that we can develop the technology to do so, getting it there is more difficult though. As it might be difficult to hold. Also we'd indeed not be built for the the problem. Then again Genetic engineering will get us a long way. Also the possibilities are endless. However a source of energy, is the first imperative. Technology and infrastructure can grow. And perhaps we manage to crash some ice meteorites on the surface too.

    So yes, if we want to we can terraform mars and grow and sustain an atmosphere and depending on how badly we want/need it, we could even make our own ocean's. But none of it is easy or cheap. And right now most resources go out to sustaining our population as it already is. So whatever we do, it will have to be done on-site and with as little resources as possible.
    In the information age ignorance is a choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Let's stick a rocket engine on Venus' backside.
    Then move it into an Earths orbit- on the other side of the Sun.
    Cool it down, do some atmospheric conditioning... Plants some tough and resilient plants and build shielded buildings from Radiation from Outer Space...
    Home sweet home.

    Ok, not exactly feasible, but one can dream.
    KDB likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Kerling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Let's stick a rocket engine on Venus' backside.
    Then move it into an Earths orbit- on the other side of the Sun.
    Cool it down, do some atmospheric conditioning... Plants some tough and resilient plants and build shielded buildings from Radiation from Outer Space...
    Home sweet home.

    Ok, not exactly feasible, but one can dream.
    Well it is not unfeasable, but it is really simple. If we'd swap Venus with Mars then probably both planets would have a viable means of life on it. Shielding from the sun might actually not be such a weird idea, as making a large reflective surface is rather simple. However it would also be impractacle due to space junk meteorites etc. But not impossible. I don't know enough about the conditions of water etc on Venus though. I have never been able to Acces the Venera probe data :P
    In the information age ignorance is a choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerling View Post
    Well it is not unfeasable, but it is really simple. If we'd swap Venus with Mars then probably both planets would have a viable means of life on it. Shielding from the sun might actually not be such a weird idea, as making a large reflective surface is rather simple. However it would also be impractacle due to space junk meteorites etc. But not impossible. I don't know enough about the conditions of water etc on Venus though. I have never been able to Acces the Venera probe data :P
    I think shuffling planets around is the job for a very advanced race...
    The shielding should be relatively simple and quite doable with todays technology. Shielding from falling debris, not so easy. Venus' magnetosphere leaves something to be desired...
    Water would be a problem. Again, an advanced race could probably manufacture it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    [Water would be a problem. Again, an advanced race could probably manufacture it.
    Bring in Oort cloud comets for dissolution in the atmosphere. That will aslo bring a nice range of other chemicals, including organics. We virtually have the technology now to be able to do that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    [Water would be a problem. Again, an advanced race could probably manufacture it.
    Bring in Oort cloud comets for dissolution in the atmosphere. That will aslo bring a nice range of other chemicals, including organics. We virtually have the technology now to be able to do that.
    You're right- I'm a complete idiot. If that society could move Venus, comets should be no problem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Kerling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    I think shuffling planets around is the job for a very advanced race...
    The shielding should be relatively simple and quite doable with todays technology. Shielding from falling debris, not so easy. Venus' magnetosphere leaves something to be desired...
    Water would be a problem. Again, an advanced race could probably manufacture it.
    Haha, god no, I didn't actually mean that we should shuffle them. But if by change they would be evolved in time differently, it would be convenient.
    It would probably be possible to shield it yes. Smart shielding. It would be rather expensive though. Maybe once we terraformed mars, Venus will follow. But it isn't simple at all.

    Manufacturing water is actually simple Just get a large enough fusion reactor. In about a hundred years we'll have perfected the technique and we'll just create energy and oxygen as a waste product. Find some hydrogen to make water. Making the thing will be incredibly intensive, but safe as Mars's population will be low by then. It wouldn't require an additional power source, and just create more. Provided we have enough hydrogen. But by then we'd probably be able to find that on mars or ship it in from Jupiter or something alike. Or just steer water holding meteors into the planet. That is actually most easy.
    In the information age ignorance is a choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    A lunar population is much more likely to me. Every bit of distance travelled in space costs money and supplies, the closer the better. Also, what if an emergency were to happen? I can hear a mission team on Earth now, "Don't worry, we'll be there in ten years, just hang on." Or we could simply stop breeding like rabits to make Earth more roomy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Kerling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    440
    There isn't much to gain on the moon. That is the problem really. But yes, advanced interstellair spaceships would most likely be, one way trips. This makes it economically difficult.
    In the information age ignorance is a choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerling View Post
    There isn't much to gain on the moon. That is the problem really. But yes, advanced interstellair spaceships would most likely be, one way trips. This makes it economically difficult.
    There isn't much to gain on Mars either. But it would give our species another accomplishment to egotistically hang on it's belt.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Kerling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerling View Post
    There isn't much to gain on the moon. That is the problem really. But yes, advanced interstellair spaceships would most likely be, one way trips. This makes it economically difficult.
    There isn't much to gain on Mars either. But it would give our species another accomplishment to egotistically hang on it's belt.
    Well, true there isn't much to gain currently. But if there is a source of water. It would be like a small faucet with water in the middle of the sahara desert. Even though we are all loafin around in this large swimmingpool. We might have plenty here, but it is good to know we are not trapped. Not only to mention the value of water for life.
    In the information age ignorance is a choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerling View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerling View Post
    There isn't much to gain on the moon. That is the problem really. But yes, advanced interstellair spaceships would most likely be, one way trips. This makes it economically difficult.
    There isn't much to gain on Mars either. But it would give our species another accomplishment to egotistically hang on it's belt.
    Well, true there isn't much to gain currently. But if there is a source of water. It would be like a small faucet with water in the middle of the sahara desert. Even though we are all loafin around in this large swimmingpool. We might have plenty here, but it is good to know we are not trapped. Not only to mention the value of water for life.
    Add to this - water makes it a possible source of fuel in the future, from a location very near Earth and a much lower escape velocity than Earth.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Kerling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    440
    Do you mean the hydrogen from it?
    In the information age ignorance is a choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerling View Post
    Do you mean the hydrogen from it?
    I was being more simple, thinking of the boilers in a fission reactor.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    I think instead of trying to put an atmosphere on Mars or the Moon, we should just burrow under them and build a tunnel network.

    The lighter gravity should make the rocks easier to lift, and the weight on the tunnels from above would be less than for a tunnel on Earth.


    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerling View Post
    Well it is not unfeasable, but it is really simple. If we'd swap Venus with Mars then probably both planets would have a viable means of life on it. Shielding from the sun might actually not be such a weird idea, as making a large reflective surface is rather simple. However it would also be impractacle due to space junk meteorites etc. But not impossible. I don't know enough about the conditions of water etc on Venus though. I have never been able to Acces the Venera probe data :P
    I think shuffling planets around is the job for a very advanced race...
    The way to move a planet would be by using the "gravitational sling shot" effect that NASA uses to get some of its deep space probes into the outer solar system by bringing them near to planets in a strategically chosen angle of approach.

    sling

    To move a planet, we'd need to hurl large amounts of heavy debris toward it at just the right angle so it gradually changes its motion, but doesn't enter it's atmosphere, and never actually touches it at all. It just interacts with it gravitationally on it's way past.

    Impossible? No. Practical? Also no.

    It would be fun to try, though, if humanity were ever super rich, and bored.



    Water would be a problem. Again, an advanced race could probably manufacture it.
    It's easy enough to bring things down. If we're in space to begin with, we could go to Ceres and get all the water we need, then hurl it into a decaying orbit to rendezvous with Venus. Moving freight in space is the ultimate easy - as long as you have a very good computer to calculate the initial trajectory with. Just give it a good push, and it will float to its destination on its own.



    Hard to get things back up from Venus, though. If you joined the Venus colony, and decided to live there, it would probably be a one way trip.

    90% of Earth's gravity means you need a rocket ship that's almost as advanced as the one you used to leave Earth. This is the one area where Mars is much, much, better.
    Neverfly likes this.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Kerling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerling View Post
    Do you mean the hydrogen from it?
    I was being more simple, thinking of the boilers in a fission reactor.
    Probably not the fuel of choice on mars though.
    In the information age ignorance is a choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Kerling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    I think instead of trying to put an atmosphere on Mars or the Moon, we should just burrow under them and build a tunnel network. The lighter gravity should make the rocks easier to lift, and the weight on the tunnels from above would be less than for a tunnel on Earth.
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerling View Post
    Well it is not unfeasable, but it is really simple. If we'd swap Venus with Mars then probably both planets would have a viable means of life on it. Shielding from the sun might actually not be such a weird idea, as making a large reflective surface is rather simple. However it would also be impractacle due to space junk meteorites etc. But not impossible. I don't know enough about the conditions of water etc on Venus though. I have never been able to Acces the Venera probe data :P
    I think shuffling planets around is the job for a very advanced race...
    The way to move a planet would be by using the "gravitational sling shot" effect that NASA uses to get some of its deep space probes into the outer solar system by bringing them near to planets in a strategically chosen angle of approach. slingTo move a planet, we'd need to hurl large amounts of heavy debris toward it at just the right angle so it gradually changes its motion, but doesn't enter it's atmosphere, and never actually touches it at all. It just interacts with it gravitationally on it's way past. Impossible? No. Practical? Also no. It would be fun to try, though, if humanity were ever super rich, and bored.
    Water would be a problem. Again, an advanced race could probably manufacture it.
    It's easy enough to bring things down. If we're in space to begin with, we could go to Ceres and get all the water we need, then hurl it into a decaying orbit to rendezvous with Venus. Moving freight in space is the ultimate easy - as long as you have a very good computer to calculate the initial trajectory with. Just give it a good push, and it will float to its destination on its own. Hard to get things back up from Venus, though. If you joined the Venus colony, and decided to live there, it would probably be a one way trip. 90% of Earth's gravity means you need a rocket ship that's almost as advanced as the one you used to leave Earth. This is the one area where Mars is much, much, better.
    You are not very good at this are you?Moving planets? Will never be very realistic.
    In the information age ignorance is a choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerling View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerling View Post
    Do you mean the hydrogen from it?
    I was being more simple, thinking of the boilers in a fission reactor.
    Probably not the fuel of choice on mars though.
    Now, that depends on whether or not Quaid starts the reactor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kerling View Post
    Moving planets? Will never be very realistic.
    He pointed that out, actually. That is why the crack about the human race being rich and bored.
    Flick Montana likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    66
    The initial research and development of reflective planetary shielding as well as solar sail technology could easily be paid for by our major consumer product corporations.
    They would be happy to invest in giant earth orbit billboards.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Kerling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by Daedalus View Post
    The initial research and development of reflective planetary shielding as well as solar sail technology could easily be paid for by our major consumer product corporations.
    They would be happy to invest in giant earth orbit billboards.
    Sure, they would. But 2 problems. One it would have to be projected by powerfull lasers (really powerfull) probably earth based. Meaning flightless zones. And citizens don't want their skies to be sold. :P
    If they already object their views being blocked by windmills. They won't allow that either.
    In the information age ignorance is a choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    I would think it would be more practical to create an artificial object with a huge magnetic field and put that in the sky instead. (And by "more practical" I mean still absurdly impractical. Just slightly less so.)

    Of course if the citizens live in underground caves, the solar wind probably won't be able to penetrate all that rock.

    Another interesting possibility would be to build huge glass domes. Especially on the Moon, where silicon is incredibly abundant.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Professor leohopkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Dulwich, London, England
    Posts
    1,417
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    I would think it would be more practical to create an artificial object with a huge magnetic field and put that in the sky instead. (And by "more practical" I mean still absurdly impractical. Just slightly less so.)

    Of course if the citizens live in underground caves, the solar wind probably won't be able to penetrate all that rock.

    Another interesting possibility would be to build huge glass domes. Especially on the Moon, where silicon is incredibly abundant.
    The problem with the idea of huge glass domes is that, on Earth we get bombarded by meteor showers very often, but the Earth's atmosphere is sufficiently thick enough to burn and vaporise the rocks before they can do any damage. Mars does not have the luxury of nice thick atmosphere, and neither does the moon.
    The hand of time rested on the half-hour mark, and all along that old front line of the English there came a whistling and a crying. The men of the first wave climbed up the parapets, in tumult, darkness, and the presence of death, and having done with all pleasant things, advanced across No Man's Land to begin the Battle of the Somme. - Poet John Masefield.

    www.leohopkins.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Can we melt mars ?
    By Max Time Taken in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: February 17th, 2012, 04:48 AM
  2. Mars used to have life...
    By x(x-y) in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: August 7th, 2010, 07:31 AM
  3. REVIVING BODE'S LAW
    By Suhail Jalbout in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: May 25th, 2008, 02:39 AM
  4. Humans on mars (Mars Undergound , Robert Zubrin)
    By shawngoldw in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: August 1st, 2007, 05:31 AM
  5. Reviving a Dead Universe
    By zinjanthropos in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: December 31st, 2006, 07:06 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •