- Status
And there is the problem. Sometimes I really hate them when they say "this planet was called by us superhabitable because of our standards". This is something I cannot allow, for me this is wrong. Thank you for understanding it!
Hi,
On the recent photos of the top of the Perseverance rover I noticed a joy stick device with emblems looking like a cryptic message about the evolution of Earth:
https://mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/mult...0667216999_291FDR_N0010052ZCAM00013_0630LUJ01
What is it?
On the recent photos of the top of the Perseverance rover I noticed a joy stick device with emblems looking like a cryptic message about the evolution of Earth:
https://mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/mult...0667216999_291FDR_N0010052ZCAM00013_0630LUJ01
What is it?
Last edited:
Well, i'm happy that Perseverance has landed (successfully) and is about to begin its mission of exploration. I believe Mars may have once had life on it . But i also don't think there's any now . So, i think Mars is ripe for human exploration and eventual colonization . I'd like to know about Mars' minerology . And, i think we should begin terraforming. It will be a long process . Somehow or other , we have to add more air to Mars atmosphere . How about using Mars' moons as anchors to which we could attach huge mirrors to help increase Mars temperature and release the CO2 and H2O into the atmosphere . With more sunlight , Mars should heat up fairly quickly . And we could then introduce plant life . So, lets get started .
All the wonder of planatery science and automated intelligence for another huge achievement for space exploration.
At last , what is the secrect for monitoring long project?
Cheers Space lovers!
At last , what is the secrect for monitoring long project?
Cheers Space lovers!
Catastrophe
"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
"I believe Mars may have once had life on it." Possible
"But i also don't think there's any now." Very probable
"i think we should begin terraforming." Useless and virtually impossible.
"It will be a long process." What makes you think the human race will last that long?
"Somehow or other , we have to add more air to Mars atmosphere." You are joking?
The rest? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I do admire your enthusiasm, but I believe you need to think it through more carefully.
Cat
"But i also don't think there's any now." Very probable
"i think we should begin terraforming." Useless and virtually impossible.
"It will be a long process." What makes you think the human race will last that long?
"Somehow or other , we have to add more air to Mars atmosphere." You are joking?
The rest? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I do admire your enthusiasm, but I believe you need to think it through more carefully.
Cat
I would like to make a general observation about Perseverance. This is a mission where they are actually supposed to be checking for fossils. In the past pictures have been made of very strange rock formations that looked like various things including bones. NASA never really responded to those observations. But now when there is an observation of a really strange looking rock that they might finally check it out and see if we are seeing what we think we are seeing.
Ehmm, of course. This is something can't be described in a short message. I'm not blaming you or the guy whom you replied, but I think we can colonize it. I watched a video, and this time I luckly have the possibility to show you what is this (I saved it, on youtube). I don't know how to share a link, for this reason I do it in my way, the video is this:"I believe Mars may have once had life on it." Possible
"But i also don't think there's any now." Very probable
"i think we should begin terraforming." Useless and virtually impossible.
"It will be a long process." What makes you think the human race will last that long?
"Somehow or other , we have to add more air to Mars atmosphere." You are joking?
The rest? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I do admire your enthusiasm, but I believe you need to think it through more carefully.
Cat
I really hope I wrote it correctly. In this documentary there are all the possible steps to terraform Mars. Maybe this doesn't seem possible, but if you try to imagine this, that isn't so hard. Firstly, we have to warm the planet, but we have to take in account the possibility to ruin it. Secondly, we have to achieve a quite good atmosphere, I mean thick. And besides that, you have to make the air "breathable". As the video shows (I know, this is very long but well made in my opinion) we can use those farms spreading greenhouse gases that make the atmosphere thicker and the planet warmer, two points figured out in one simple move, but outstanding I guess. I really don't know wheather the source is reliable, but since I'm interested in this topic I know something about it, and I can feel wheater something is correct or not, in other word, I think this documentary is trustable! I nearly forgot: the proces of "making the air breathable" is something so simple that I don't think I should talk about it...
Excuse me for my bad style but this is a topic very difficult to talk about for me...
Catastrophe
"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
Please attend: I posted terraforming was useless and virtually impossible, and I stand by that.
Colonisation is quite different and very possible - eventually.
Colonies can be quite small and readily achievable - with enough effort.
Terraforming involves making the whole planet Earthlike, complete with atmosphere
Not in our lifetimes - if ever!
Cat
Colonisation is quite different and very possible - eventually.
Colonies can be quite small and readily achievable - with enough effort.
Terraforming involves making the whole planet Earthlike, complete with atmosphere
Not in our lifetimes - if ever!
Cat
Catastrophe
"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
"Firstly, we have to warm the planet, but we have to take in account the possibility to ruin it. Secondly, we have to achieve a quite good atmosphere, I mean thick. And besides that, you have to make the air "breathable"."
Do you realise the amount of energy needed to warm a planet?
Do you realise the sheer weight of gas to provide an atmosphere?
Stick to colonisation - if the human race lasts beyond 2022.
Cat
Do you realise the amount of energy needed to warm a planet?
Do you realise the sheer weight of gas to provide an atmosphere?
Stick to colonisation - if the human race lasts beyond 2022.
Cat
Catastrophe
"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
From Britannica? How Much Does Earth’s Atmosphere Weigh? | Britannica
"The total mass of Earth’s atmosphere is about 5.5 quadrillion tons, or roughly one millionth of Earth’s mass. Earth’s atmosphere extends from its ocean, land, and ice-covered surface outward into space, and its density is greatest close to the surface, because the gravitational attraction of the planet pulls the gases and aerosols (microscopic suspended particles of dust, soot, smoke, or chemicals) inward."
A quadrillion is the next -illion after a trillion. It's equal to one followed by 15 zeros, and equal to a million billions or a thousand trillions, which is pretty insane.
Not only do you have to provide / move / from where? but you have to maintain a suitable breathable pressure, sufficient to prevent humans bursting on a planet which has lost such an atmosphere once due to insufficient gravity. And you have to heat - not only the atmosphere but the surface - which will be constantly in contact with the atmosphere (i.e., random movement of gas particles hitting surface and losing kinetic energy).
Colonisation - perhaps
Terraforming - never in a million years.
Cat
"The total mass of Earth’s atmosphere is about 5.5 quadrillion tons, or roughly one millionth of Earth’s mass. Earth’s atmosphere extends from its ocean, land, and ice-covered surface outward into space, and its density is greatest close to the surface, because the gravitational attraction of the planet pulls the gases and aerosols (microscopic suspended particles of dust, soot, smoke, or chemicals) inward."
A quadrillion is the next -illion after a trillion. It's equal to one followed by 15 zeros, and equal to a million billions or a thousand trillions, which is pretty insane.
Not only do you have to provide / move / from where? but you have to maintain a suitable breathable pressure, sufficient to prevent humans bursting on a planet which has lost such an atmosphere once due to insufficient gravity. And you have to heat - not only the atmosphere but the surface - which will be constantly in contact with the atmosphere (i.e., random movement of gas particles hitting surface and losing kinetic energy).
Colonisation - perhaps
Terraforming - never in a million years.
Cat
Catastrophe
"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
Just to clarify: A quadrillion is the next -illion after a trillion. It's equal to one followed by 15 zeros, and equal to a million billions or a thousand trillions, which is pretty insane. (Wiki)
Weight of Mars compared to Earth
"Mars' mass is 6.42 x 1023 kilograms, about 10 times less than Earth." (Wiki)
So if you take 1/10th the mass of atmosphere, this is still 0.55 quadrillion tons
or 550,000,000,000,000 tons - and you still don't know whether this will give sufficient pressure.
Where are you going to get it, and how are you going to move it, and then maintain it?
Cat
Weight of Mars compared to Earth
"Mars' mass is 6.42 x 1023 kilograms, about 10 times less than Earth." (Wiki)
So if you take 1/10th the mass of atmosphere, this is still 0.55 quadrillion tons
or 550,000,000,000,000 tons - and you still don't know whether this will give sufficient pressure.
Where are you going to get it, and how are you going to move it, and then maintain it?
Cat
First of all, excuse me for not replying, this week was hard for me.
In order to bring my speech to a conclusion, I want to reply this questions:
This is something true. Colonisation of Mars is possible, but if don't terraform Mars, the only chance you have is that to live underground. Mars' underground is a place in which you can be warm and keep breathe as well as keep away from radiations. This seem to be a good solution for the beginning, but if you have to go in this way for one millennium I really don't thik that this is good. In other words, we must terraform Mars.
What do you mean? Now, you say that we can do it in a far future, then you say we couldn't even do it in a far future?
Anyways, maybe I didn't understand it correctly, something possible, so...Please be more precise...
In order to bring my speech to a conclusion, I want to reply this questions:
Yes and yes. We are trying to do our better to don't warm our planet, althought we are burning it. We can warm Mars with atomic bombs, or however nucler explosions, the choise is large. The second question is more difficult to reply, and I have to find a solution with very few means, maybe we can bring gasses from Earth, or, we can take them from the inner layer of Earth if we cannot use Earth's atmosphere, I don't know exactly, but I know that in future this will be possible.
As I have already said, we can use atomic bombs.. If we use them we figure out all the problems. The surface will be warmed as well as the atmosphere...
Here there is a problem. A very big problem. Anyways, heavy gasses can be the solutions, they would became part of the overall weight of the planet...Now, I really don't know. As far as I'm concerned to problem is too heavy for me. Many people appreciate in me the characteristic that when I understand the problem isn't something that I can solve, I acknowledge it, and this is what I want to do now. I gave you all the possible solution I could give, but now I acknowledge I'm not so clever to go on...
Catastrophe
"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
"Not only do you have to provide / move / from where? but you have to maintain a suitable breathable pressure, sufficient to prevent humans bursting on a planet which has lost such an atmosphere once due to insufficient gravity"
Sorry, I repeat. You have no solution to offer. Atomic bombs? radiation. Check raw material availability to release, and maintain, that much energy.
With regard to gases, I suggest you check the relative occurrence in the galaxy (and further) of the heavier gases you propose (which are?). See how all matter is built from hydrogen and helium by fixed stoichiometric routes.
Then please reply again.
Cat
Sorry, I repeat. You have no solution to offer. Atomic bombs? radiation. Check raw material availability to release, and maintain, that much energy.
With regard to gases, I suggest you check the relative occurrence in the galaxy (and further) of the heavier gases you propose (which are?). See how all matter is built from hydrogen and helium by fixed stoichiometric routes.
Then please reply again.
Cat
Last edited:
Of course, of course. You're right when you say I can't talk about atomic bombs. As the video I proposed says, if we sent bombs to Mars, we would make Mars gets more and more nake of atmosphere. If the problem was too much cold, we would figure this out with atomic bombs, but unlucky for me, this isn't the case. I want to apologise with you for this great mistake, I would have had to have the overall vision, but I didn't.
In my opinion, it is useless get around it, the solution is in the chemistry field, I'm talking about gases. I really want you to watch that video I shared six-seven days ago, I don't remember very well how the spread of gas would be the solution, but I rembember it. As far as I know trying to remember that video I can say the the key is in that farms spreading greenhouse gases. You set them on Mars, farms spreading gases, heavy gases:
I really don't think that this is important, but if you want to know that, I guess methane and carbon dioxide, as well as ozone, nitrous oxide and xenon and radom, but I'm not totally sure about the two last ones. I have no competences in gases and chemistry, and, as I usually say, let's let chemists do chemistry, my fields are Astronomy and Physics, even if I'm not very strong in both...
Anyways, as I was telling before this parenthesis, this farms would have only one task to work out: spread these gases. These gases would be trapped by the atmosphere (Mars atmosphere would get stronger and stronger, and I really don't think that as you may think, gases go away). In my opinion, as the martian atmosphere get stronger and stronger, the overall planet tends to be heavier and it can be trap more atmosphere(?)
If that is true, I solved the problem. Any questions?
I nearly forgot, if there were much more greenhouse gases, the planet itself (and the surface too) would be warmed more than now, I think that the problem is solved...
Catastrophe
"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
"If that is true, I solved the problem. Any questions?"
No, it is not true, and I do have some questions.
First of all, you stress the inert gases, or rare gases as they re also known. From the relative proportions of gases (as you see from my reference) these are present in small amounts Not sufficient to contribute to Mars' atmosphere in any useful way.
Second, you have ignored the fact that Mars has not the gravity to retain an atmosphere. Any idea that any planetary atmosphere has a mass remotely comparable to the mass of the planet (solid + liquid) is, to be honest, unthinkable. Take the mass of solid Earth (OK solid + liquid) -look at Earth's diameter. Now look at the extremely thin layer of insubstantial gas surrounding it - the atmosphere. If you like, I will look up the mass of Earth. Mass of atmosphere is already quoted above. I think that one is also settled.
I am very sorry. I believe this whole idea is dead in the water. I have the greatest respect for you but I really do think you have to look carefully at the reality. You are not the sort of person who says "Don't confuse me with facts - my mind is made up".
With sincere best wishes,
Cat
No, it is not true, and I do have some questions.
First of all, you stress the inert gases, or rare gases as they re also known. From the relative proportions of gases (as you see from my reference) these are present in small amounts Not sufficient to contribute to Mars' atmosphere in any useful way.
Second, you have ignored the fact that Mars has not the gravity to retain an atmosphere. Any idea that any planetary atmosphere has a mass remotely comparable to the mass of the planet (solid + liquid) is, to be honest, unthinkable. Take the mass of solid Earth (OK solid + liquid) -look at Earth's diameter. Now look at the extremely thin layer of insubstantial gas surrounding it - the atmosphere. If you like, I will look up the mass of Earth. Mass of atmosphere is already quoted above. I think that one is also settled.
I am very sorry. I believe this whole idea is dead in the water. I have the greatest respect for you but I really do think you have to look carefully at the reality. You are not the sort of person who says "Don't confuse me with facts - my mind is made up".
With sincere best wishes,
Cat
Catastrophe
"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
Just noticed I gave this already in post #63:
"The total mass of Earth’s atmosphere is about 5.5 quadrillion tons, or roughly one millionth of Earth’s mass. Earth’s atmosphere extends from its ocean, land, and ice-covered surface outward into space, and its density is greatest close to the surface, because the gravitational attraction of the planet pulls the gases and aerosols (microscopic suspended particles of dust, soot, smoke, or chemicals) inward." Wiki. My emphasis.
Thus if you doubled the density of the atmosphere (whilst keeping the oxygen level) the atmosphere would be 1/100,000th of Earth mass.
Wiki gives:
“The density of air at sea level is about 1.2 kg/m^3 (1.2 g/L, 0.0012 g/cm^3).”
i.e., S.G. is 0.0012, at sea level, reducing rapidly with height.
Density (S.G.) of Earth (same source) is 5.51, that is 5.51/0.0012 = 4592 times that of atmosphere. Diameter of Earth is 12,742 km. Height of troposphere is 0 to 12 km x 2/2 (2 because atmosphere is on both sides and /2 for average height).
Thus “Thickness of Earth is about 1062 times that of troposphere and about 4592 times as dense.
I hope that concludes that point.
Cat
"The total mass of Earth’s atmosphere is about 5.5 quadrillion tons, or roughly one millionth of Earth’s mass. Earth’s atmosphere extends from its ocean, land, and ice-covered surface outward into space, and its density is greatest close to the surface, because the gravitational attraction of the planet pulls the gases and aerosols (microscopic suspended particles of dust, soot, smoke, or chemicals) inward." Wiki. My emphasis.
Thus if you doubled the density of the atmosphere (whilst keeping the oxygen level) the atmosphere would be 1/100,000th of Earth mass.
Wiki gives:
“The density of air at sea level is about 1.2 kg/m^3 (1.2 g/L, 0.0012 g/cm^3).”
i.e., S.G. is 0.0012, at sea level, reducing rapidly with height.
Density (S.G.) of Earth (same source) is 5.51, that is 5.51/0.0012 = 4592 times that of atmosphere. Diameter of Earth is 12,742 km. Height of troposphere is 0 to 12 km x 2/2 (2 because atmosphere is on both sides and /2 for average height).
Thus “Thickness of Earth is about 1062 times that of troposphere and about 4592 times as dense.
I hope that concludes that point.
Cat
Last edited:
Catastrophe
"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
OK I have watched relevant video, and I find it full of caveats - if this and maybe that.
Do you know who made it? The only ref is be/_50N5QoQoc4 unlike NASA videos which, in my experience, are clearly labelled.
Now, please correct me, but the aim is self sufficiency on Mars - terraforming. Here there is a fatal error. They do ask where do the gases come from, as there is no CO2 from volcanoes, and no plate tectonics on Mars. They say if the gases are gone forever, it would be bad news, but is there enough gas to "bring it back"? If not, they say, it would push off the idea of habitability to "when new technologies become available" after an unguessed period of time.
So here is my refutation, which I cannot see addressed anywhere in the video.
We are discussing terraforming and human life on Mars should Earth become uninhabitable - yes?
Now we know that Mars gravity cannot retain an Earth-type atmosphere. We also know that you cannot tinker with the atmosphere composition to make it heavier - see above.
We know that Mars has already lost an atmosphere - and it would do so again, because of the preceding points. But replenishing such an atmosphere (and oxygen is much more of a problem than carbon dioxide) can only continue until Mars' resources run out.
We have discussed the total impracticality of importing 550,000,000,000,000 tons of atmosphere and replacing it as quickly as it exhausts to space. Even then you have to find it and probably convert it chemically from oxides for example - easier said than done in practice.
By the way, I forgot to mention above, when discussing your proposed atmosphere compositions, that many other gases can be ruled out because of greenhouse effects. You may want a little, but runaway effects would take over and give you too much. Vide Earth today,
You might like higher temperatures ,but not too high, as this would speed up loss of atmosphere to space (oxygen quicker than CO2). Current Earth atmosphere composition is (ibid) Nitrogen — 78 percent. Oxygen — 21 percent. Argon — 0.93 percent. Carbon dioxide — 0.04 percent.
Sorry. According to all facts and logic, terraforming is not a practical process in the light of present science. Of course, if you want to resort to science fiction, anything can be imagined.
Cat
Do you know who made it? The only ref is be/_50N5QoQoc4 unlike NASA videos which, in my experience, are clearly labelled.
Now, please correct me, but the aim is self sufficiency on Mars - terraforming. Here there is a fatal error. They do ask where do the gases come from, as there is no CO2 from volcanoes, and no plate tectonics on Mars. They say if the gases are gone forever, it would be bad news, but is there enough gas to "bring it back"? If not, they say, it would push off the idea of habitability to "when new technologies become available" after an unguessed period of time.
So here is my refutation, which I cannot see addressed anywhere in the video.
We are discussing terraforming and human life on Mars should Earth become uninhabitable - yes?
Now we know that Mars gravity cannot retain an Earth-type atmosphere. We also know that you cannot tinker with the atmosphere composition to make it heavier - see above.
We know that Mars has already lost an atmosphere - and it would do so again, because of the preceding points. But replenishing such an atmosphere (and oxygen is much more of a problem than carbon dioxide) can only continue until Mars' resources run out.
We have discussed the total impracticality of importing 550,000,000,000,000 tons of atmosphere and replacing it as quickly as it exhausts to space. Even then you have to find it and probably convert it chemically from oxides for example - easier said than done in practice.
By the way, I forgot to mention above, when discussing your proposed atmosphere compositions, that many other gases can be ruled out because of greenhouse effects. You may want a little, but runaway effects would take over and give you too much. Vide Earth today,
You might like higher temperatures ,but not too high, as this would speed up loss of atmosphere to space (oxygen quicker than CO2). Current Earth atmosphere composition is (ibid) Nitrogen — 78 percent. Oxygen — 21 percent. Argon — 0.93 percent. Carbon dioxide — 0.04 percent.
Sorry. According to all facts and logic, terraforming is not a practical process in the light of present science. Of course, if you want to resort to science fiction, anything can be imagined.
Cat
Last edited:
Wolfshadw
Moderator
What if we built a really long vacuum hose from Venus to Mars....
The theory I believe is that Mars had a thick atmosphere with sufficient pressure to allow for liquid water on the surface. However, for whatever reason, the core of Mars shut down and Mars lost it's magnetic field. It was this that allowed the solar winds to slowly start stripping away Mars' atmosphere and turned the planet into what it is today.
As for terraforming Mars, you and I are in agreement that it cannot be done with today's science. Given the above theory, the only way to successfully terraform Mars would be to get it's core spinning again and aside from creating an artificial moon.... Hmmm... we do have a LOT of garbage on this planet... LOL
-Wolf sends
To my (admittedly limited) knowledge, The gravity on Mars hasn't changed (significantly) since the planet formed. So if gravity didn't change, why did the Mars atmosphere change from the (theoretical) wet planet we believe it was to what it is now?
The theory I believe is that Mars had a thick atmosphere with sufficient pressure to allow for liquid water on the surface. However, for whatever reason, the core of Mars shut down and Mars lost it's magnetic field. It was this that allowed the solar winds to slowly start stripping away Mars' atmosphere and turned the planet into what it is today.
As for terraforming Mars, you and I are in agreement that it cannot be done with today's science. Given the above theory, the only way to successfully terraform Mars would be to get it's core spinning again and aside from creating an artificial moon.... Hmmm... we do have a LOT of garbage on this planet... LOL
-Wolf sends
Catastrophe
"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
For completeness, I did not respond to the mention of asteroids. As you probably know, this would not help:
"The total mass of the asteroid belt is estimated to be 2.39×1021 kilograms, which is just 3% of the mass of the Moon. The four largest objects, Ceres, 4 Vesta, 2 Pallas, and 10 Hygiea, account for maybe 62% of the belt's total mass, with 39% accounted for by Ceres alone. , 2 Pallas, and 10 Hygiea, account for maybe 62% of the belt's total mass, with 39% accounted for by Ceres alone. "
Cat
"The total mass of the asteroid belt is estimated to be 2.39×1021 kilograms, which is just 3% of the mass of the Moon. The four largest objects, Ceres, 4 Vesta, 2 Pallas, and 10 Hygiea, account for maybe 62% of the belt's total mass, with 39% accounted for by Ceres alone. , 2 Pallas, and 10 Hygiea, account for maybe 62% of the belt's total mass, with 39% accounted for by Ceres alone. "
Cat
Catastrophe
"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
Here are some NASA ideas as of September 2019:
www.nasa.gov
Cat
NASA Research Gives New Insight into How Much Atmosphere Mars Lost - NASA
A key tracer used to estimate how much atmosphere Mars lost can change depending on the time of day and the surface temperature on the Red Planet, according
www.nasa.gov
Cat
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Basic Error: The accelerating Universe conclusion - reason- Started by Gibsense
- Replies: 188
-
-
Definition of Universe requires clarification, to enable discussion
- Started by Catastrophe
- Replies: 38
-
-
Just a couple of questions please about just how far back we can model.- Started by Starstruck
- Replies: 12
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram