Venus Thread

[Anonymous No.11332151]

Hypothesis as to what it was like in the past, future exploration, past moons, etc.

[Anonymous No.11332455]

>>11332151
>>Hypothesis as to what it was like in the past
we dunno lol. A mission to a tessera is our best bet at determining what it was like in the past. Problem: tessera are the most extreme terrain on Venus. A lander would need to be capable of landing on shear cliff faces. NASA doesn't want to do a mission like that cause it's very risky.

[Anonymous No.11334040]

>>11332151
geological activity has been confirmed on Venus. Some lava flows might be only a couple years old. They're quite big too, on the order of 100 km long or more.

[Anonymous No.11334043]

>>11332151
It may have been like Mars and Earth in the early Archean possibly with shallow seas due to plenty of water in the atmosphere

[Anonymous No.11334055]

>>11334043
and if we find granitic minerals we know it will be true

[Anonymous No.11334063]

>>11334055
We need to design a lander that can work longer than five minutes

[Anonymous No.11334217]

>>11334063
landers have lasted a couple of hours, this would be sufficient time for finding granite. One of the pioneer venus multiprobes which wasn't even designed to land, sent data back for over an hour after landing.

[Anonymous No.11334468]

>>11332151

It was once a beautiful paradise, but then the inhabitants didn't listen to Venusian Greta and now look at it...

[Anonymous No.11335363]

Coronae are an interesting geological feature on Venus. Artemis Coronae is surrounded by a deep trench structure.

[Anonymous No.11335802]

>>11334063
There was a lander concept designed to work off of mechanical computers (clockwork).

[Anonymous No.11335809]

>bioengineer microscopic oxygenating bacteria
>release in canisters in venusian atmosphere
>wait 1,000 years
>enjoy terraformed sister planet surface

[Anonymous No.11336209]

>>11335809
what you are asking for basically requires the bacteria to be magical. Venus just doesn't have that much hydrogen.

[Anonymous No.11336414]

>>11332151

Great videos on the topic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FbbcGpcFNs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOXVrh4d-KM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsYPhN168MM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Taz18Ss1vU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LF9ZmaiDMBk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSxMFWBV440

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02Agr63aMWE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJdjZm67bWk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF5zrPPdExY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRcUN6J5gK0

[Anonymous No.11337073]

>>11332151
Why are you posting a shitty UV image?

Would you post a UV image of Earth to represent Earth? No you fucking wouldn't.

I get that Venus looks boring but THAT IS IRRELEVANT - the important thing is that it should be shown ACCURATELY so that people know what it ACTUALLY looks like.

[Anonymous No.11337979]

>>11337073
because you can see shit you can't otherwise? Pretty hard to see movements of the clouds in visible light.
Info on pic related. There's also that unusual UV absorber.
>>Akatsuki’s IR2 camera relies on heat emanating from the lower atmosphere of Venus to image the nightside lower clouds. The infrared radiation originating beneath the clouds silhouettes the lowermost cloud deck, so areas of thicker cloud appear darker in this photo. At lower left, the camera’s detector is overwhelmed by the brilliance of sunlight reflecting off the daylit crescent.
https://www.planetary.org/blogs/guest-blogs/2019/venus-ocean-of-air-and-clouds.html

[Anonymous No.11338486]

>>11337073
Bro the guy who made the Venus model just procrastinated till the night before and this was the best he could come up with, a quick 3D sphere in the default color.

[Anonymous No.11338526]

>>11337979
>because you can see shit you can't otherwise?
Same with Earth, pic related. The IR and UV images show you things you don't otherwise see.

But to show those images as representative of Earth would be MISLEADING because those AREN'T how Earth appears to our eyes.

Yes Venus is pretty featureless in real-colour, but the public should not be misled about what it actually looks like.

Sure maybe there is no requirement that the OP post a real-colour image, but false-colour images of Venus are used nearly always, like the orangey one which is a radar image of Venus's surface. It's completely misleading to the public because it's giving the impression that that's what Venus looks like to our eyes, when it isn't.

>>11338486
No, it's a real-colour image from MESSENGER in 2007:
>https://www.planetary.org/blogs/emily-lakdawalla/2009/2105.html
Also for more information on MESSENGER:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MESSENGER

[Anonymous No.11339000]

>>11338526
ok autist, who here is saying that those UV or false color images are what Venus really looks like? Images in different wavelengths are much more useful than visible.

[Anonymous No.11339077]

>>11339000
>Sure maybe there is no requirement that the OP post a real-colour image, but false-colour images of Venus are used nearly always, like the orangey one which is a radar image of Venus's surface. It's completely misleading to the public because it's giving the impression that that's what Venus looks like to our eyes, when it isn't.

[Anonymous No.11339096]

>>11334468
kek

[crackme2 No.11339097]

ó ¦ó ¬ó ¡ó §ó €ºó €µó ó €3ó „

[Anonymous No.11339143]

>>11332151
So how do we even attempt to colonize it? How do we 'land' there? How do we prop up a floating city there before landing and attempting to colonize it?

[Anonymous No.11339162]

>>11339077
fuck the public, they can watch star wars movies for all I care. Oh, and false color images like this tell us more about the layer cloud structure allowing us to extrapolate what it would actually be like on Venus.
>>11339143
We don't. There just isn't enough hydrogen

[Anonymous No.11339163]

>>11332151
i came

[Anonymous No.11339180]

stupid question, but is venus basically turning into a gas planet?

[Anonymous No.11339295]

>>11339162
>yeah the public SHOULD be misled and made ignorant about science! who cares about the truth?
Fucking moron.

UV images are useful of course. And maybe I shouldn't have reacted so strongly to OP using a UV image, since he's perfectly entitled to, and UV images are still accurate and informative.

But I was just highlighting the issue that Venus is often misrepresented, in images like pic related, on the left side of the image. The picture of Venus is a false-colour radar scan of Venus's surface. It is the only planet (or moon) in the picture to have a false-colour image, and a radar image too.

On the right is an edit I just made with the only real-colour image of Venus I've been able to find. In fact I don't know why I can't find more of them, it's weird. There's another one on some websites which is an "enhanced" real-colour image, but that's obviously not completely accurate either.

[Anonymous No.11339313]

>>11339143
Colonising Venus is a nonsensical idea, which is why NASA is focused on Mars.

>>11339180
It's a terrestrial planet with a dense atmosphere. Nearly all of the planet is rock I think, it just has a dense atmosphere. I don't think the atmosphere is very deep relative to the planet though, I think it's just a thin, very dense layer. Whereas the gas giants like Jupiter and Saturn are mostly gas. I think.

[Anonymous No.11339327]

>>11339313
oh well, that sucks. would be cool for mankind to turn venus into a gas giant that eats all the asteroids, and provides earth with wind power, instead of trying to terraform it.

[Anonymous No.11339367]

>>11334063
Solved problem.

[Anonymous No.11339377]

>>11339295
whatever autist. No one gives a fuck. You know what gets my goat though? Dumb science journalists saying venus has acid rain. We have never observed rain on Venus. Sure downward movement of sulfuric acid is expected, but the amount of precipitation you get is expected to be much lower than earth rain events. Like really really low. Like a single drop per meter. The clouds are not very dense either. Also evidence for venusian lightning is very sketchy, so you should ignore claims of it.
>>11339327
That's fucking dumb. If you can move enough mass to make a gas giant, you can just round up all asteroids ever. If you can make a gas giant, you probably have something better than wind power.
>>11339313
The cloud cities aren't that nonsensical. What's nonsensical is that it's incredibly hard to obtain hydrogen which you need for basic necessities like water. You need the mass flow rate of a jet engine to accumulate any significant amounts of sulfuric acid, the most easily extractable hydrogen source, from the atmosphere. And that's at altitudes where it's most concentrated.
>>11339367
It really is as some probes have lasted about two hours on the surface. NASA's working on LISSE which is a simple surface probe built with high temperature electronics that could last a month

[Anonymous No.11339450]

>>11339377
>DUDE LET'S JUST MISINFORM THE PUBLIC ABOUT SCIENCE
You're just as bad as a flat Earther, you fucking moron.

[Anonymous No.11339479]

>>11339313
>Colonising Venus is a nonsensical idea, which is why NASA is focused on Mars.

It’s perfectly possible. Steal the atmosphere and take it to Mars.

[Anonymous No.11339504]

>>11339479
That wouldn't count as colonising Venus then would it...

Also surely it makes more sense to just heat up the ice caps of Mars and create an atmosphere that way

[Anonymous No.11339506]

>>11339504
>That wouldn't count as colonising Venus then would it...

Colonize it after we suck away the atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.11339811]

>>11339506
Gonna be way easier to just go to Mars which is why NASA is focusing on Mars

[Anonymous No.11339882]

>>11339479
>>11339506
and how the fuck would you accomplish that?
>>11339504
heating up mars does not release enough gas to make an atmosphere
https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/goddard/2018/mars-terraforming/

[Anonymous No.11339896]

Venus was stillborn. It had a collision with another body during it's formation which slowed its rotational rate to once every 200 days. That left it without a magnetic field to keep the solar wind at bay, so it's stuck with it's primordial volcanic atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.11341112]

>>11339504
>shield Mars from solar wind with artificial moon at its L1
>bio-engineer an atmosphere
It never ceases to amaze me how slowly we're moving towards these goals as a species. I get we maybe shouldn't do it if there's (some) life on mars however likely it is that won't be anything other and single-celled life (considering it'd interfere in what may one day become a habitable planet all by itself a few billion years from now as the sun expands) but even so we should be literally racing to find out. I guess things are starting to finally get moving somewhat, but I will never understand how for example I as a european citizen pay about 1€ in taxes/year to ESA while about a factor 50 to 500 of that goes to fucking oil companies and yet more to a completely decrepit "financial services" sector. Thanks for reading my blog rant.