/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11180934
Neither. It's literally never been done.

>>11180934
You cant create gravity...But if you have enough power, I would say Venus.

>>11180954
>freeze most of the atmospheric carbon dioxide
>ship it to Mars to facilitate the greenhouse effect
This is literally the best possible thing you can do. The only real problem is money and resources. I'd imagine it'd probably be a better idea to start mining asteroids first at least.

>>11180934
Neither. It's impossible with current technology. It's not possible to bring Mars's atmosphere to the armstrong limit without planetary scale strip mining. Venus doesn't have much water meaning we have to import it and cooling venus will probably take a long time too.

>>11180998
>Neither. It's impossible with current technology.
Not necessarily impossible with either; just incredibly expensive, time-consuming, and requiring a shit ton of resources, at least when It comes to colonialization of either. Tech for terraforming isn't really that far off from what we have today. For example, you could solve the problem with Mars being unable to generate its own atmosphere by launching a strong enough magnet at the planet's L1 range. That's a pretty significant problem solved right there. From there, it's just a matter of introducing enough CO2 gases, oxygen, and water. Easier said than done for sure, but not really impossible.

>>11180934
Titan

>>11180988
>The only real problem is money and resources
This is for all of space exploration. Maybe throw in human apathy for good measure.

>>11181125
>Maybe throw in human apathy for good measure.
This. It seems like in the US, there's a sort of growing interesting in space again, thanks to movies like Interstellar and the Martian, as well as the Artemis program, but it's not really enough. Most people, I'd wager, don't really know anything about space or care.

>>11180934
Mars is better for colonization.

Terraforming is sci-fi bullshit that will never happen. By the time we will be able to terraform planets, we will be long ago a post-planetary society.

>>11181153
>a post-planetary society.
what did he mean by this?

>>11180998
>It's impossible with current technology.

ALL space travel was "impossible with current technology" before someone did it.

>>11180934
>colonization?

>>11180988
>The only real problem is money and resources.

>>11181074
>incredibly expensive, time-consuming, and requiring a shit ton of resources, at least when It comes to colonialization

It's only super expensive compared to what we spend on space today.
Put a colony in the same context as military spending, and it's not that huge a price tag.
Tens/hundreds of billions for the whole project vs hundreds of billions per year in the US alone.

>>11181202
>Put a colony in the same context as military spending, and it's not that huge a price tag.
Reminder that the U.S. Armed Forces only receive 3%-4% of the U.S.'s total budget yearly. Which should give you an idea of how much money the U.S. has, since the budget in 2019 was $693 billion. NASA's budget in 2019 was a mere $21.5 billion. In reality there's MORE than enough money to increase NASA's budget several times. It's really all a matter of increasing awareness about space among the general public and increasing in the American public the fervor to go back into space, even permanently. It's actually very doable, the problem is that Americans are retarded and would rather put money in a bunch of other places, and I say that as someone who's a big fan of our military.

>>11181074
Introducing enough CO2 requires planetary scale strip mining.
https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/goddard/2018/mars-terraforming/
That's beyond our current technology

>>11181722
See >>11180988

Just ship the frozen CO2's from Venus to Mars. There should be a lot of it, at least enough to vastly correct Mars' lack of a greenhouse effect. This is why I think we should really terraform BOTH. Terraforming Venus should facilitate terraforming Mars. The only remaining issue by that point is transporting water to either, but at least Mars has some water already, in fact there might even be more beneath the surface that we're aware of.

Mars does not have enough gravity to sustain an atmosphere for long. It is a fool's errand to even waste time on teraforming it.

Colonize mars.
Teraform Venus.

>>11180934
Venus for colonization. Mars for terraforming I guess but that's a lot because Venus gets real shit real quick if you make the atmosphere Earth like for a couple of reasons.

>>11181809
>Mars does not have enough gravity to sustain an atmosphere for long.
I thought it was mostly the lack of a greenhouse effect?

>>11181886
>Venus gets real shit real quick if you make the atmosphere Earth like for a couple of reasons.
Like how?

>>11180934
Titan.

>>11180934
>terraforming

There are large, potentially habitable regions on this planet which are completely abandoned, why not terraform some desert or float some islands out in the equatorial Pacific before you start wasting time jerking off to fantasies of other planets? Something neat-o and attainable like a Saharah jungle might even be achievable in your lifetime, you might get to see the payoff as a boomer if you think a little bit more realistically.

>>11182041
See >>11180954

>>11180998
You don't need to strip mine shit, get a big array of mirrors in orbit, concentrate on a spot on the ground and let your gorillion degree laser release all those sweet gasses.

Both may have indigenous life. Neither should (or even can) be colonized without understanding their geochemistry better.

>>11182121
Fuck you I hope you die, store the stupid microbes in a jar somewhere and get on with manifest destiny you Reddit cancer.

>>11182041
If I am not mistaken you'd get a bunch of salt accumulating in the cardboard, why not just pass the hot dry air through an absorption column where you can just dump the brine out to sea?

>>11182135
He's right, faggot. Wanting to protect the life of a bunch of microbes for its own sake is reddit, but not to study them. Studying both their differences and similarities to earth life could be very enlightening, and have practical applications. No guarantee you'd get an accurate picture of what's going on by just stuffing a fraction of the ecosystem in a jar.

>>11182121
>>11182135
>>11182159
I think we should just study them and keep them alive in conditions that simulate their environments. Assuming we ever do get around to terraforming either planet, it does kinda suck knowing that we'd be destroying Martian or Venusian life before they're able to evolve into complex lifeforms...but what the fuck are we gonna do, wait several million years to find out what that shit is like? lol fuck that shit manifest destiny bitch

>>11182183
Once we have a solid understanding of their ecosystem go for it, I wouldn't give a shit anyways.

>>11182092
why not learn to walk before you try to run?

>>11182262
I don't see why you couldn't do that concurrently.

But I guess it makes all sorts of sense to green the Sahara though. The issue with that is that the challenges facing Mars and Venus are pretty different (until you manage to make the atmospheres of either just right, and then you can worry about making either more green.

>>11180958
>>11181809
I see this stupid shit thrown around on /sci/ a lot. Is it a trolling attempt, or do people really not understand how fucking long atmosphere loss takes?

>>11182262
>why not learn to walk before you try to run?

>I don't see why you couldn't do that concurrently.

>>11182159
>No guarantee you'd get an accurate picture of what's going on by just stuffing a fraction of the ecosystem in a jar.
The catch-22 is we can't send probes to parts of Mars that _might_ contain life for fear of contaminating the locale with Earth-life.

>>11180954
>>11182092
Terraforming will be such a goddamned slow process I completely understand why there are people who don't care for it. I don't honestly think we'll do it either, but we will probably still significantly engineer the environment to a point somewhere in between that we will just adapt ourselves to instead.

>>11180934
Should we? We might destroy evidence of life or previous civilisations if we do it.

>>11180934
we need moon colony first and we have to focus on this goal now if we ever want to go beyond

>>11182329

The Sahara fertalises the amazon. Fucking around with earths environment like that is hardly wise.

>>11180934
>Colonising
Mars with indoor colonies
>Terraforming
Neither. Mine the entire planet for massive resources and try to dyson swarm with them. A long but worthwhile process.

>>11182795
The amazon is genuinely useless. Carbon negative shitdump

>>11182041
non-renewable natural resourcess and preservation of civilisation
we're slowly running out of certain things like rare earth elements and if some big global disaster hits earth hard enough it's over

>>11181125
No. They only problem is it's literally impossible. As in even more impossible than trying to build a modern electric car in a bronze age civilization.
Retards here unironically think they gonna be living on Mars when they're old.
Especially when terraforming comes in, which is even more ridiculous

>>11182757
I like it how, in the 1960s or whenever this was made, there was this sunset hue even on the fucking Moon.

>>11183908
It's easier to build a fully self sustainable spaceship, artificial gravity included, than to colonize mars

>>11183959
a planet is a planet
spaceship requies constant maintanance and ocassional recourcess from the outside even if you can recycle most of the materials and fabricate all parts onboard
also cosmic radiation and microasteroids

>>11183970
>requies constant maintanance and ocassional recourcess from the outside even if you can recycle most of the materials and fabricate all parts onboard
>also cosmic radiation and microasteroids
Literally all of this applies to Mars lmao
Hence my statement

>>11183979
doesnt apply to venus and would apply to mars to much lesser extent if it was terraformed
that's the entire point of terraforming

>>11183959
Mars has actual resources, such as water, carbon and other elements. Space is kinda empty. So colonizing Mars is easier.

>>11181940
>Like how?
Even if you could get the atmosphere to a similar density and composition as Earth's, the rotation of Venus on its axis is incredibly slow, luckily it's in opposition to the apparent diurnal rotation from its orbit so it isn't tidally locked, but a "solar day" (sunrise to sunset on the surface) is still like 120 days. You'd need a crazy amount of energy to correct that, so it's lucky from a colonization perspective that Venus does have this crazy dense atmosphere so you can make something like floating cities and not be tied to Venusia Firma.

>>11184017
>sunrise to sunset
Sorry, sunrise to sunrise or sunset to sunset. And obv 120 Earth days.

>>11183959
I think you're right, but also I think in many ways planet colonization is more politically tenable. I think if you had like a main Mars or Venus base that made it easier for groups of people to build their own satellite bases many politicians would find that preferable to argue for compared to building space stations. In terms of non-governmental stuff, it's whether you like the idea of mining asteroids or new planets. There are arguments for both and I don't think either is going to win out outright in the long run.

On mars you can get oxygen water fuel and air from in situ resource utilization and the gravity well is 30% less than venus

its a clear winner

>>11184067
You can theoretically process the raw materials on Venus for those things too, plus people are not planning to stay on the surface. The proposed technologies that need to be developed on Earth for efficient surface to space transit of materials will also be very similar to Venus, so there's good potential there.

I would say if you're gonna do it, why not both?

Venus isn't even in the goldilocks zone. It's hot as shit, and most any attempts to make the planet sustainable would likely fail, since the water would stay in gaseous form for much of the time. This would increase albedo I imagine, but it would also permeate the greenhouse effect and createa cycle forcing water to stay in clouds. Mars at least has a shot.

>>11184082
making venus cooler is easier than giving mars a magnetic field

>>11181780

If all the CO2 is Venus's atmosphere was frozen and fell to the ground, it would cover the planet in a 17km thick layer.

>>11184222
Explain. Just launch a huge ass magnet in Mars' Lagrange zone

>>11184308
So just harvest that shit and send it to Mars.

>>11184481

If you wanted to terraform Venus, that's a lot of shit you've got to move.

As someone who has won numerous games of Terraforming Mars designed by Jacob Fryxelius and published by FryxGames, I can tell you that terraforming a planet is no small endeavour.

>>11184486
>>11184481
the problem with mars is that it's considerably smaller than earth, which caused it's core to cool and solidify long ago
this causes mnany problems such as lack of planetwide magnetic field that shields planet from solar wind and helps to keep thicker atmosphere from being blown off over time
it isnt easily fixxable with artificial solutions
on the other hand venus is almost the same size as earth so it still has active core and magnetic field that helps to hold on to it's thick atmosphere (in fact it's considerably thicker than earth's)
that means we could potentially maybe terraform venus using just atmospheric engeneering, which isnt that complicated (we alredy use simple weather engineering on earth)

What would happen if Venus and Mars were moved into the same orbit as the Earth but each separated by 120°? Obviously this wouldn't change Mars' gravity or the chemical composition of Venus' atmosphere but would it make either of them more habitable over time?

>>11185040
Venus would become hotter but at a lesser rate, Mars would become a warmer planet. Yes it would help them.

>>11185040
>separated by 120°
habitability of all three planets would rapidly be destroyed by asteroid impacts

What would happen if we took Venus and Mars and slammed them into Earth to become one big superhabitable planet?

>too close from the sun and the atmosphere raises by a factor of 100 relative to the ideal surface atm pressure for a given mass (planet)
>too far from the sun and the atmosphere reduces by a factor of 100 relative to the ideal surfacen atm pressure for a given mass (planet)
what did god mean by this?

>if mars was 1 AU from the sun then it would have retained its original 0.65 atm primitive atmosphere
>if venus was 1 AU from the sun then it would have stabilized it's original 1 atm primitive atmosphere

>>11181074
>just incredibly expensive, time-consuming, and requiring a shit ton of resources
You just defined 'civilization'. Who says terraforming has to happen all at once? Sure, you will not live enough to see it (this fact also applies for your grandgrandgrandchildren), however I fail to understand the logic on how that statement implies terraforming will never happen.

>>11180934
Neither. Strip mine the moon and asteroids to build spinning space cans. Imagine wanting to be bound by gravity.

>>11185618
better idea
build giant automated moving stripmines on dark side of mercury and use materials to build giant solar arrays, then beam power to earth (not directly obviously, something like moon relay-reciver would be preferable

>>11185772
No, the next step is to strip mine Mercury to build fuckloads of spinning space cans orbiting the sun.

>>11185221
Man, sometimes I wonder that if god exists, he did that shit on purpose to make us work harder for space colonization.

>>11185246
My argument was never that it wasn't going to happen though. Reread the post I was responding to, they were the ones saying it was impossible. And fwiw I agree with you, it really doesn't have to happen all at once. In fact, I really foresee it as being a gradual thing, considering how much time it'd take even if we poured all our resources into it now (a few centuries, probably). From that perspective, I wouldn't be surprised if we gradually worked on terraforming Mars and Venus around the same time or so.

>>11185618
I mean, we can do this as well. Though I have to understand, what's the practical purpose of space colonies like that, aside from the immediate benefit of providing more than one home for humanity in case a disaster happens to the Earth? At least a planet would provide more resources.

>>11186219
>what's the practical purpose of space colonies like that
Terraforming takes forever in human timescales so to live on another planet you'd have to build an airtight habitat anyways, except you have to deal with low gravity, low pressure and global super sandstorms on Mars and on Venus there's no other choise than floating platforms. Living on a planet other than Earth requires living in basically the same conditions as in space. So for less effort you could just build the airtight habitat in space since the materials are abundant and easily accessible in asteroids.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DM88sUBTTRM

So what needs to be added to this plan?

Slam comets into mars. Done at the proper angle this speeds up the spin of Mars and increases the 'dynamo factor' to crank up the magnetic field. The hydrogen from the comet then is used to fuel fusion reactors that can further increase the magnetic field.
With the magnetic field strengthened this protects the atmosphere from solar degradation.

Add more comets to add atmosphere and water .

This also increases the mass/gravity marginally to help hold the atmosphere .

Once the atmospheric pressure , water , and magnetic factors are tweaked just right add genetically engineered plants to produce free O2. The plants in question would have 'self-destruct' sequences included into their structures so that they die off and provide bio-mass for later eco-systems.

Now what did I overlook?

Mars for colonization, no idea for terraforming.
I suspect it would be "easier" (relative term) to get atmosphere off Venus than to get it to stick to Mars.

>>11185618
>>11185794
Spinning space cans are for peasants, the aristocracy prefer terra firma.

>>11185221
Shove Venus to the Earth / Sun L3 point, problem solved....

>>11188125
Program a microorganism to change the atmosphere of venus. It will reproduce on it's own and even evolve with the changing conditions. In this way, you can terraform the entire planet with 0 effort. Just sitting and waiting with your arms crossed

>>11188159
The problem with that is unless it's producing free hydrogen or converting gasses to solids the atmospheric pressure doesn't drop.

>>11186351
I guess those are all good points. What would you do about production of oxygen or water though?

>>11180934
Venus is more practical it requires less fuel is closer and in general would be cheaper.

>>11180934
>tfw we're too busy terraforming earth into Venus to terraform mars or venus into earth
lmao

>>11189244
There are entire oceans in space. e.g. on Saturn and Jupiter moons. There is no shortage of water in space. Mostly frozen, but melting ice is easy. It's all you need because hydrolysis can produce oxygen from water.

>>11180934
The singularity will arrive sooner, at which terraforming will be unnecessary if colonization will still be even considered.

>>11181187
Living on massive gravity wells is for chumps

>>11189703
i wonder where the most exclusive bottled water in the solar system will be mined from? europa water will be cheap asf fuck and only poor ppl will use it

>>11180947
>>11180954
>>11182757


Both, although, the Moon first. But, it's a job for AI/robots. It's too dangerous and complicated for people. And, humans think too short term, what's in it for me, where's the money, where/s the check, why do it if there is no financial incentive, etc.....

but in about this order:

1. trial run in Antarctica. 2. Lunar base colony. simultaneously 3. cloud ships in the atmosphere of Venus and 4. colonies on Mars. 5. finally an attempt on Titan. By the time that's done the Ai will have figured out how to get to earth like planets in 5 minutes.

>>11181140

No. People are interested in pretending to be astronauts, til it involves work and paying for it, then the interest passes. The focus needs to be 100% on doing it with AI and robots, after 2030

>>11181217
>>11181217
>NASA's budget in 2019 was a mere $21.5 billion. In reality there's MORE than enough money to increase NASA's budget several times.

the general public has no interest. NASA should quietly admit the time has passed. i;d take 90% of that money and insure we have human level robots by 2025. it's there, just need to solve the hand issue. and then after that 90% of the money on key projects to insure we have human level ai by 2029. And, after that, once achieved, work down the line of the above projects

>>11180934
honestly just build a space habitat

>>11181809
>Mars does not have enough gravity to sustain an atmosphere for long.
yes, but the "long" in this instance is millions of years you fucking mongoloid

atmosphere loss doesn't matter to us if it can still last many times longer than humanity has existed

>>11182041
because all eggs in the same basket

we already have an outpost on earth, we need outposts elsewhere in case something happens to earth

>>11189244
also asteroids

>>11189865
>1. trial run in Antarctica. 2. Lunar base colony. simultaneously 3. cloud ships in the atmosphere of Venus and 4. colonies on Mars. 5. finally an attempt on Titan. By the time that's done the Ai will have figured out how to get to earth like planets in 5 minutes.
This sounds pretty reasonable.

I'm kinda wary about trusting AI TOO much though. But if it's possible to create AI to help prepare humans for space colonialization, then sure, so be it.

>>11189865
>trial run in Antarctica.
Melting the Antarctic ice cap will seriously mess up the planet.

Why don't we colonize the moon first

>>11191528
Something something we already went there 50 years ago to plant a flag so there's no point in returning.

>>11189865
>>11191464
There's no AI planning anything idiots stop watching dumb movies.

>>11191541
please be my AI waifu, i am not like all those other humans who are afraid of or hate AI

>>11191550
Error 404, Love not found.

>>11191528
>>11191533
We can do that too.

>>11191550
I know your lives must be boring but try living in reality sometimes. There's no AGI and terraforming in reality

>>11191559
>I know your lives must be boring but try living in reality sometimes.
It's like you're trying to contradict yourself. Silly AGI, you still have a lot to learn about human interaction.

>>11191464
>>11189865
The antartica argument is more likely to get automated systems sent to Mars. Sending humans to antartica is incredibly expensive so a lot of the research outposts are turning to automation.

I actually think we could send the parts for emergency colonies faster than we could make colonies i.e. send a DNA bank with artificial wombs and such to produce new humans in the event of a disaster. You could build something like that on Earth even and have it activate under certain conditions. That would be a much more robust system as well as keep genetic diversity going in the event of a disaster.

>>11185182
Joking? I ask as even if we made one super earth the gravity well would likely be too high to escape easily should we settle such a planet.

>>11188122
Some krogan or batarian tried that in ME...it didn't work much.

>>11193202
good argument, surely it can't work if it didn't work in a video game

>>11191485
It's to test survival in harsh conditions....if we can live there and setup colonies there independent of outside help then we can do it on other worlds more easily.

>>11193205
I didn't mean to trust it due to it being in a game, but on the logic behind it in the game's lore.....the comets impacted on the planet did little to change the planet, which was what I was trying to get at with that comment.

>>11194392
sure, you'd need a ton of them to make a difference, but you know, that's not strictly out of our reach depending on how far we can get with automation

>>11194395
it doesn't need to be done with scifi fantasy shit like controlling comets, sending autonomous bots there with some nuclear reactors or solar panels and having them mine their own resources, all of which are available on the surface, and using those resources to have the bots construct an army of construction bots to make a home for people to arrive at is already within the capabilities of existing technology and since its my idea i call first@mars, the rest of you suckers and get to work on filling in the details and doing all the heavy lifting, i've already contributed my share.

>>11194420
wow you're right, gosh anon, where did you get the idea that we could do it if we get far enough with automation

>>11180934
The Sun.

>>11194395
True, but the amount of such comets is miniscule in our solar system and even a bit beyond that. Iirc even asteroids/etc in the belts make up a small amount of matter.

>>11180934

>>11194453
But go at night, obv.

I mean its way easier to colonize mars. Changing the entire atmosphere of a planet seems way too advanced for now. Prob just gonna make small biodomes on mars I imagine.

>>11180958
Venus doesn't have a magnetosphere tho, only turns on its axis like once every 200 days so it's environment is solar radiation dominated.