TERRAFORMING MARS

[CreatedEvolution]

I am curious to see how terraforming mars has developed. It has evolved since ten years ago. they are now considering mirrors and radiation and releasing co two at the poles.

I am going to pretend I have six hundred trillion dollars to skillfully invest.

I would first invest in lasers in orbit on our planet.
Such as could we station a laser at the poles of Mars to use the laser so strong it actually begins to form magma where the laser is coming in contact. the goal is for the laser to cut into Mars deep enough where the magma pocket underground will form natural volcanoes to cool. How big of pool of magma will we need to release a steady amount of carbon dioxide.

If we find a laser that will cut miles deep before forming magma that is exactly what I am looking for. with these miles deep magma pool we may eventually create a soft spot for the remaining core to become naturally active to our man made pocket of magma.

how big will the laser have to be. could we consider combing one hundred space lasers. if each laser cost ninety million we could average the cost of each rocket laser at two hundred million. twenty billion approved for space lasers terraforming mars.

I believe if we have enough volcanoes matching our point five billion co2 released on earth a year that mars atmosphere would near level out to ours if it had an equal amount of co2 produced by active volcanoes.

I like choosing the poles of the planet because many co2 or ice has formed there and that will release additional steam and atmospheric gases adding to the atmospheric pressure.

Will any one take the fun task of estimating how strong a laser has to be or how much volcanoes we would need to terraform mars?

I think we could do it with just creating a few pockets of magma that will have many volcanoes each.

 

[Astraeus]

ChatGPT rose to the challenge:

Positive Aspects:​

1. Creative ambition​

The author is trying to think big: multi-orbital laser systems, magma activation, and CO₂ release from polar regions. That kind of exploratory mindset is essential in long-term planetary engineering discussions.

2. Real concepts referenced​

• Polar CO₂ deposits: Mars has frozen CO₂ (dry ice) at its poles. Releasing this could help increase atmospheric pressure.
• Terraforming through greenhouse gas accumulation: A valid direction discussed in real Mars terraforming proposals.
• Solar mirrors and focused heating have indeed been proposed before (by Zubrin and others).

---

Scientific and Engineering Critique:​

1. Misunderstanding of laser-magma interaction​

• Lasers can ablate surface material, but forming magma pools by lasering from orbit is orders of magnitude beyond current or foreseeable technology.
• Melting rock with lasers requires sustained, immense energy delivery over a narrow focal area. Even terawatt-class lasers wouldn’t achieve “miles-deep” magma drilling from orbit.
• Mars' crust is thick, cold, and geologically inactive. Heating it locally won't "wake" the core.

2. Core reactivation misunderstanding​

• The idea that creating surface magma pools will “reawaken” Mars’ core is not scientifically supported. Planetary cores require internal heat, mass, and differentiation—not just heat injection near the surface.
• Mars' core is partially solidified due to its small size and lack of sufficient internal pressure. You can’t relight it with external energy in this way.

3. Volcanic CO₂ estimates are massively off​

• Earth’s volcanoes emit about 0.3–0.5 billion tons of CO₂ per year. Mars would need many thousands of active, large-scale volcanoes to match this—sustained over centuries.
• Artificially initiating this scale of volcanism is beyond current planetary engineering capabilities.

4. Cost and scaling​

• Even generous estimates (e.g., 100 lasers at $200 million each = $20B) are wildly optimistic, especially without:
  • Launch costs
  • Power generation systems
  • Stabilization infrastructure
  • Targeting and thermal control
• Also, there's no real-world precedent for sustained megawatt-scale lasers in orbit with this kind of geological precision.

---

Summary and Evaluation​

This post is imaginative but scientifically flawed. It confuses key concepts in geology, thermodynamics, and planetary science. It also assumes futuristic levels of engineering control over planetary-scale processes without addressing power requirements, timeframes, or fundamental physical constraints.


That said—it's a fun prompt, and if reframed properly, it could spark useful discussion. A more realistic version would be:

• Focused solar mirrors to release CO₂ from polar ice
• Greenhouse gas production (e.g., perfluorocarbons) by robotic factories
• Subsurface nuclear thermal energy used to melt permafrost and slowly raise pressure

 

[Catastrophe]

Here is the summary of my AI question:

Google Search

"Stationing a powerful laser at the poles of Mars to melt rock and create magma is a fascinating concept, but it's not feasible with current technology. While lasers can vaporize and even melt small amounts of rock for scientific analysis, according to a NASA blog post, creating large-scale magma bodies on Mars would require unimaginable energy and engineering feats."

Cat

 

[Catastrophe]

Here is the summary of my AI question:

Google Search

Cat

 

[adamator202]

I am curious to see how terraforming mars has developed. It has evolved since ten years ago. they are now considering mirrors and radiation and releasing co two at the poles.

I am going to pretend I have six hundred trillion dollars to skillfully invest.

I would first invest in lasers in orbit on our planet.
Such as could we station a laser at the poles of Mars to use the laser so strong it actually begins to form magma where the laser is coming in contact. the goal is for the laser to cut into Mars deep enough where the magma pocket underground will form natural volcanoes to cool. How big of pool of magma will we need to release a steady amount of carbon dioxide.

If we find a laser that will cut miles deep before forming magma that is exactly what I am looking for. with these miles deep magma pool we may eventually create a soft spot for the remaining core to become naturally active to our man made pocket of magma.

how big will the laser have to be. could we consider combing one hundred space lasers. if each laser cost ninety million we could average the cost of each rocket laser at two hundred million. twenty billion approved for space lasers terraforming mars.

I believe if we have enough volcanoes matching our point five billion co2 released on earth a year that mars atmosphere would near level out to ours if it had an equal amount of co2 produced by active volcanoes.

I like choosing the poles of the planet because many co2 or ice has formed there and that will release additional steam and atmospheric gases adding to the atmospheric pressure.

Will any one take the fun task of estimating how strong a laser has to be or how much volcanoes we would need to terraform mars?

I think we could do it with just creating a few pockets of magma that will have many volcanoes each.

Mars has no magnetic field and is unprotected from radiation and other factors.

 

[Wolfshadw]

Mars has no magnetic field and is unprotected from radiation and other factors.

Mars does have a magnetic field. It's just much weaker than that of the Earth and cannot protect the surface from solar/cosmic radiation.

-Wolf sends

 

[CreatedEvolution]

added magma to the core will create continental shifts created a stronger maggnetic field. via the emfs generated by volcanoe holes. In my crazy theory a magma conduit can generate an emf and if the core is heated enough all the motion creates a magnetic field its hard to describe.

my best analogy is how an emf works or a wire coil. it can be used as a magnet. I suggest having enough volcano conduits will produce a magnetic field... the hotter the core, the bigger the stretch of the magnetic field or thicker magnetic field.

 

[Tundatech]

I am curious to see how terraforming mars has developed. It has evolved since ten years ago. they are now considering mirrors and radiation and releasing co two at the poles.

I am going to pretend I have six hundred trillion dollars to skillfully invest.

I would first invest in lasers in orbit on our planet.
Such as could we station a laser at the poles of Mars to use the laser so strong it actually begins to form magma where the laser is coming in contact. the goal is for the laser to cut into Mars deep enough where the magma pocket underground will form natural volcanoes to cool. How big of pool of magma will we need to release a steady amount of carbon dioxide.

If we find a laser that will cut miles deep before forming magma that is exactly what I am looking for. with these miles deep magma pool we may eventually create a soft spot for the remaining core to become naturally active to our man made pocket of magma.

how big will the laser have to be. could we consider combing one hundred space lasers. if each laser cost ninety million we could average the cost of each rocket laser at two hundred million. twenty billion approved for space lasers terraforming mars.

I believe if we have enough volcanoes matching our point five billion co2 released on earth a year that mars atmosphere would near level out to ours if it had an equal amount of co2 produced by active volcanoes.

I like choosing the poles of the planet because many co2 or ice has formed there and that will release additional steam and atmospheric gases adding to the atmospheric pressure.

Will any one take the fun task of estimating how strong a laser has to be or how much volcanoes we would need to terraform mars?

I think we could do it with just creating a few pockets of magma that will have many volcanoes each.

I see a problem here. Im assuming you already know that mars has no magnetic field because the interior of the planet cooled and hardened. To restart geological activity like volcanos and magnetic field, it would require being able to force enough energy into the planet to remelt the majority of said planet. I dont believe a million of our best lasers would be able to pull that off in our lifetime. I too struggle with the terraforming concept. Nothing short of a major collision with a moon sized object would jumpstart molten processes in mars again. There is also the problem with the atmosphere it use to have. It was blown away by solar winds when mars cooled off then it lost its magnetic field. If we could steer icy asteroids or comets into mars. The impacts would generate heat and the icy bodies would vaporize and produce an atmosphere. But if the interior of the planet does not become molten there will be no circulation around the core which creates the magnetic field. The Atmosphere brought by the icy asteroids and comets would eventually be blow back into space like before. Mars was doomed from the beginning to suffer this fate. By the time it was finished sweeping up the material it could from the accretion disc. It had fallen short of having enough mass to maintain a molten core like earth. It also got the cold end of the stick being much further from the sun. If Mars was like 1.2 times the size of earth it would probable still have its field and its atmosphere in its present location. But it is 30% smaller than earth. There lies the problem. Not enough mass. The best we can hope for is an environment a bit more hospitable than the moon. Unless some actions are taken to bring the heat and the water. There is some water on mars. But it will have to be mined. It's in the soil and possibly some in the very thin atmosphere. There is hope for mars in the future without any help from mankind. Ther will be a time when the heat from the sun warms mars more than it does now. it's part of the life cycle of stars. The earth will become hotter and so will Mars. But humans can't wait that long. They talk about darkening the poles to release frozen CO2 and water there. I wonder how long the planet will hold onto it before its gone to space. One of the main focuses of Mars colonists will be extraction and storage of as much water as they can get their hands on. Water on Mars is fuel. Water on earth is water not fuel. Hmmm Something wrong with that picture. What's gasoline going for per gallon now days? That reality is so frustrating. Anyway. It will be a struggle as long as we are there. But with time things can get better.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

I see a problem here. Im assuming you already know that mars has no magnetic field because the interior of the planet cooled and hardened. To restart geological activity like volcanos and magnetic field, it would require being able to force enough energy into the planet to remelt the majority of said planet. I dont believe a million of our best lasers would be able to pull that off in our lifetime. I too struggle with the terraforming concept. Nothing short of a major collision with a moon sized object would jumpstart molten processes in mars again. There is also the problem with the atmosphere it use to have. It was blown away by solar winds when mars cooled off then it lost its magnetic field. If we could steer icy asteroids or comets into mars. The impacts would generate heat and the icy bodies would vaporize and produce an atmosphere. But if the interior of the planet does not become molten there will be no circulation around the core which creates the magnetic field. The Atmosphere brought by the icy asteroids and comets would eventually be blow back into space like before. Mars was doomed from the beginning to suffer this fate. By the time it was finished sweeping up the material it could from the accretion disc. It had fallen short of having enough mass to maintain a molten core like earth. It also got the cold end of the stick being much further from the sun. If Mars was like 1.2 times the size of earth it would probable still have its field and its atmosphere in its present location. But it is 30% smaller than earth. There lies the problem. Not enough mass. The best we can hope for is an environment a bit more hospitable than the moon. Unless some actions are taken to bring the heat and the water. There is some water on mars. But it will have to be mined. It's in the soil and possibly some in the very thin atmosphere. There is hope for mars in the future without any help from mankind. Ther will be a time when the heat from the sun warms mars more than it does now. it's part of the life cycle of stars. The earth will become hotter and so will Mars. But humans can't wait that long. They talk about darkening the poles to release frozen CO2 and water there. I wonder how long the planet will hold onto it before its gone to space. One of the main focuses of Mars colonists will be extraction and storage of as much water as they can get their hands on. Water on Mars is fuel. Water on earth is water not fuel. Hmmm Something wrong with that picture. What's gasoline going for per gallon now days? That reality is so frustrating. Anyway. It will be a struggle as long as we are there. But with time things can get better.

We could start to try to develop new lasers like xrays. I practically worship nikola tesla and his attitude about we have been given the tools to do anything.

I know lasers cut through metal... how far down do you think we could cut in fifty years of advancements and figurative endless bank account:?

I personally think we will be able to generate magma and a volcano but how many volcanoes or magma would re activate the cores process of volcanoes?:

 

[CreatedEvolution]

ChatGPT rose to the challenge:

Positive Aspects:​

1. Creative ambition​

The author is trying to think big: multi-orbital laser systems, magma activation, and CO₂ release from polar regions. That kind of exploratory mindset is essential in long-term planetary engineering discussions.

2. Real concepts referenced​

• Polar CO₂ deposits: Mars has frozen CO₂ (dry ice) at its poles. Releasing this could help increase atmospheric pressure.
• Terraforming through greenhouse gas accumulation: A valid direction discussed in real Mars terraforming proposals.
• Solar mirrors and focused heating have indeed been proposed before (by Zubrin and others).

---

Scientific and Engineering Critique:​

1. Misunderstanding of laser-magma interaction​

• Lasers can ablate surface material, but forming magma pools by lasering from orbit is orders of magnitude beyond current or foreseeable technology.
• Melting rock with lasers requires sustained, immense energy delivery over a narrow focal area. Even terawatt-class lasers wouldn’t achieve “miles-deep” magma drilling from orbit.
• Mars' crust is thick, cold, and geologically inactive. Heating it locally won't "wake" the core.

2. Core reactivation misunderstanding​

• The idea that creating surface magma pools will “reawaken” Mars’ core is not scientifically supported. Planetary cores require internal heat, mass, and differentiation—not just heat injection near the surface.
• Mars' core is partially solidified due to its small size and lack of sufficient internal pressure. You can’t relight it with external energy in this way.

3. Volcanic CO₂ estimates are massively off​

• Earth’s volcanoes emit about 0.3–0.5 billion tons of CO₂ per year. Mars would need many thousands of active, large-scale volcanoes to match this—sustained over centuries.
• Artificially initiating this scale of volcanism is beyond current planetary engineering capabilities.

4. Cost and scaling​

• Even generous estimates (e.g., 100 lasers at $200 million each = $20B) are wildly optimistic, especially without:
  • Launch costs
  • Power generation systems
  • Stabilization infrastructure
  • Targeting and thermal control
• Also, there's no real-world precedent for sustained megawatt-scale lasers in orbit with this kind of geological precision.

---

Summary and Evaluation​

This post is imaginative but scientifically flawed. It confuses key concepts in geology, thermodynamics, and planetary science. It also assumes futuristic levels of engineering control over planetary-scale processes without addressing power requirements, timeframes, or fundamental physical constraints.


That said—it's a fun prompt, and if reframed properly, it could spark useful discussion. A more realistic version would be:

• Focused solar mirrors to release CO₂ from polar ice
• Greenhouse gas production (e.g., perfluorocarbons) by robotic factories
• Subsurface nuclear thermal energy used to melt permafrost and slowly raise pressure

I would say it is factual that mars core is cooling not solidified. Due to it sheer size the weight of itself crushes matter to red hot magma.

If we were to add one hundred pools of magma seven miles below the surface each the size of lake superior.

question 1 would a laser "cut" to certain point before turning matter around it molten or ignited.

question 2. lets say theoretically we can put lakes of magma seven miles deep the size of lake superior. would volcanoes form in order to cool that massive amount of steam: and how much would a lake of magma the size of lake superior underground produce co2

 

[CreatedEvolution]

If we can create many lakes of magma,
then the weight of gas produced in the atmosphere will put pressure on the core heating it up