/sci/ - Science & Math

Too small, no magnetosphere. We talk about this every goddamn day.

The virgin terraforming mars vs the chad creating a new universe to live in via smashing an atom.

Wouldn't an easy way to do this just involve sending a highly durable insect like roaches to live on the surface, let them multiply and eventually their corpses make the soil fertile and the atmosphere breathable in a few hundred years?

>>10543747
The Magnetosphere issue is fixable with modern engineering techniques
>https://phys.org/news/2017-03-nasa-magnetic-shield-mars-atmosphere.html
There's also a business case to build one that's turned on periodically for Earth: the ability to shield assets in orbit all the way through cislunar space is a valuable thing.
The power draw per unit area is pretty tame, you only need a field as strong as is generated by a speaker coil.

>>10543696
No one is stopping you from terraforming Mars bro. Just go and do it brah xD

>>10543817
What are they going to eat?

>>10543696
Yes I think that would be the best option with Mars. Living on a moon of one of the big gas giants seems not to be a good option. It's too cold and the periods of natural sunlight (day and night) are too extreme.

>>10543696
>JOJ JI
Nice try roach, but no.

>>10543916
To say nothing of the ionizing radiation on the surface.

>>10543817
lol referencefagging
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_Formars

>>10543817
I read that manga too, doesn't end well.

>>10543696
It won't work idiot.

Marsaform Earth

>>10543696
I mean it is possible to do with today's technology, it's just the two limiting factors are time and resources since Mars is going to need it's soil desalinated and the fact that Mars has no atmosphere.

There's no need.

You can simply create "domed" cities or subterranean complexes and be done with it.

>>10543696
Antarctica would be cheaper to colonize, easier to colonize, and a much nicer place to live (at least it has oxygen outside, which makes it nicer than Mars. Mars is also cold and dry). Why would we colonize Mars before we finished colonizing Antarctica?

Sure, it's a nice research project and it has long term strategic value. But that doesn't mean that it's an appealing idea on its own terms.

>>10543696
Just send all heavy industry to mars and terrafork earth instead. Mars is dead.

Mars cannot hold an atmosphere, it lacks the mass. Venus is the only planet where such teraforming is realistic but even then, it's extremely difficult, you would need solar shades and some space vacuum to help dissipate the atmosphere. We're talking centuries.

>>10543696
>Also, since humans are great at using fossil fuels, using it on Mars at first to warm it up would actually be a very good idea.
This bullshit is based on the global warming hoax.
Even if it wouldn't be a hoax from where would you get fossil fuels on the Mars?

>>10545512
From fossils silly.

>>10543696
Colonization is viable and useful, terraforming dont. I used to think like you (when i had 15 yo and was retarted), but the matter of facts is that we dont need to, also Mars have so many problemas related with their gravity and magnetic field that making a biosfhere that can sustain life for more than 10k yeras is almost imposible due to its atmosphere degradaton (assuming you can terramor it in the first time) unless you can generate a 0,5-1 Tesla magnetic field for all that time, that woul requiere and incredible ammoiund of energy, more that the entery society would use in the planet per day.

Thte best approck is colonize ir and making factores and shipyards in there, investigation facilities and maybe a few cities, then moving al people to cilindric habitats this would force human biegn to recicly almost eveything innside and the input to matter/energy would be very effcient (for a biological model).

What probably will happen in reality is that we would have a couple bases in the moon and in Mars with maximun 10k people (top) in the next 200 years, then they probably will start making cities (in the best case scenarios) but they never will grown as fast and big that in earth, for many reason (social and logistic).

Also this colonies would be dommed or subterranean (for obvious reaons, you dont want to fucking die of radiation accumulation), thinking that using the same model of industrie there is also retarded, we can burn fossil fuel here beacuse of oxygen is abundant in the atmosphere, in mars would be a valious resource, bringing all the remaning fossil fuel to there would be also extremply expensive and countreproductive beacuse you would have to burn more rocket fuel per volume of fossil fuel outside earth.

>>10543696
>Terraform Mars

>>10546341
You know this is bullshit.

>>10546534
It is mocking the OP with legit info to show how fucking absurd terraforming mars would be. Meaning we can't possibly ever do it.

>>10543696
>creating breathable atmosphere on planet with insufficient gravity to hold it
>organic live on corrosive soil
>Importing billions of tons of water

Why would I want to support a planet sucking resources from earth? Literal welfare whore civilization of mole people dying of cancer at 30.

>>10543696
terraform the fucking earth first to combat global warming

>>10543696
Mars would Need a venus-like atmosphere to have earth-like temperatures but it can't hold onto an atmosphere that thick and also the Surface would be 250 bars. Its simply impossible.

Also, I dont see the Appeal, if you want to live on an earth-like planet, live on earth. Space colonies should be Spinning cylinders in space and domes on moons and planets.

>>10547499
Global warming is fake.

>>10544843
Mars has the mass, but not the magnetic field. Solar wind stripped off its atmosphere when its core stopped spinning. The plan is to put some retardedly huge electromagnet at the Mars-Sun L1.

why would we want to go to mars when we have so many problems here to fix first? we'll just do the same there unless we get our shit sorted out

durrr why don't we just nuke it

I much prefer the idea of a terraformed Venus. 9/10ths Earth gravity so you don't have to worry about becoming a weak boned filth after a few months like Mars. Just gotta think of a way to get rid of some of that thicc atmosphere. How would you do it, lads?

>>10543696
the problem with mars is the lack of a magnetic field

>>10543696
What would the effects of living in a lower than earth gravity environment be like? How many generations would it be until changes were seen?

>>10549127
You have a bigger problem than its atmosphere: its mass almost certainly contains more heavy isotopes, which contributes to its extreme volcanic activity. If you can't do something about that, then that planet's situation is hopeless for terraforming.

Mars is to be a forge world where we export from Earth all the industrial processes we don’t like doing here.

>manufacturing/refining become cheap because you can dump waste into pits
>slam asteroids into the surface and scoop up all the good bits
>nuclear powered everything

>>10544843
Why do people keep saying Mars has no atmosphere i thought it had a primary CO2 atmosphere

>>10549160
easy peasy
https://medium.com/our-space/an-artificial-martian-magnetosphere-fd3803ea600c

>>10549160
Brainlet. How can this brainless talking point still keep getting mileage?

>>10549184
Women could wear super high heels all the time with no problem.

>>10543696
Can we ban stupid terraforming threads?

>>10549205
Mars has a very thin and flimsy kind of atmosphere. It is because for some reason, in the distant past, Mars' iron core lost its momentum and with it its magnetic field. Most water and other elements have leaked into space. Why there's an abundance of CO2 still there I ignore.

>>10549402
Mars lost its atmosphere because its just too small to hold onto anything other than CO2 over geological timescales. The lack of magnetic field doesn't appear to have made much difference. Doesn't stop you from giving it a new atmosphere. You'd have to top it up every few hundred thousand years though.

>>10549317
No.

>>10548955
The mass IS the problem.

Stupid idea, the weak magnetosphere and relatively low gravity means that whatever atmosphere we introduce will be swept away by Solar radiation. Living in 1/3rd the Earth's gravity will also have a negative physical impact on any human colonizer.

If you want to colonize a planet, honestly, Venus is our best best.

Why are people obsessed with sinking so much time and resources to remake other planets, when we can just create more livable space stations?

>>10550717
Because popular culture understands what a planet is (even if they think about hollywood's mars, the california desert with a red filter), they don't really grasp what an artificial habitat is.
One day people will laugh at the idea of colonizing planets.

>>10543819
>cislunar
Tranlunars pls go

>>10549127
People often meme about the weak Mars gravity but wouldn't weak gravity be beneficial in a lot of ways?

Less strain on human heart, much easier to walk for old and weak people, far easier construction work.

>>10550717
Habitats come with a lot of other problems. Generally if the Mars shield thing works all you would need is drop some asteroids on it.

>>10543696
>>why we can't
we don't have the technology to do so in a reasonable amount of time:
https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/goddard/2018/mars-terraforming/
>>centuries
according to the study above, unless we develop radically new technology that is basically fucking magic, we can't terraform mars in a few centuries. /thread.

>>10543696
Terraforming the Moon is better.

>>10551865
We only have two reference points when it comes to gravity's long-term effects on the human body: gravity equivalent to that of Earth and no gravity. Anything in between that or above Earth's gravity is a complete mystery.

Presumably humans have a tolerance for Gravity, but I can still see there being long term deleterious effects even with marginally lower gravity than what is possible on Earth.

In something like an O'Neill cylinder, or some other kind of rotating space station, however, yeah it'd be fucking great because you wouldn't be spending long periods of time consistently at lower/higher gravities.

>>10551865
babies born in low gravity likely wouldn't develop correctly, and someone who lived there for a long time, especially children, would have low muscle mass and bone density

>>10543819
Or just rely on the ionosphere. No hyper tech is necessary.

>>10552202
Design baby-incubating chambers or satellite stations with artificial gravity. Perhaps grow those babies with artificial wombs as well.

>>10552251
k that solves the first problem

>>10544843
/thread.

>>10543696
You have absolutely no clue on how much of an undertaking "terraforming" really is. You saying a few centuries must be a joke - it would likely take millions of years, if it's even possible.

First, you'd have to accelerate and fucking smash another stellar object onto Mars, to get the core going (we need magnetosphere to get an atmosphere going, and Mars has an inactive core so no magnetosphere). Making something big enough move and actually hit Mars is so way beyond our capability that it's almost laughable to even think about it at this point outside of science fiction.

If you want to skip the part with getting a magnetosphere to protect you from cosmic and solar radiation, well, there's really no way to get an atmosphere that would last. Even if you introduce oxygen, it would literally get lost in space.

Next, of course nobody knows how to terraform anything yet. There is no science to it. In science fiction it is often done by introducing some sort of engineered plant life onto the planet, but we cannot engineer life yet - not even plants. Our genetical modifications are crude and insufficient - they are basically blind shots, trial and error forever until you find something that works. That is no way to make something so sophisticated as to be able to make a planet habitable. Even if we did have these miracle microbes, it would likely take MILLIONS of years to even get the process going, let alone finish it. On Earth it took that long, according to research.

Sorry to shit on your optimism, but you gotta check your facts.

>>10552319
>we need magnetosphere to get an atmosphere going
When we retards stop repeating this nonsense pseudo-factoid. If you're so sure that the solar wind is what made the atmosphere go away and that magnetic shielding would prevent this why not quote some numbers and references?

>>10552624
Look for them yourself retard. I'm not going to spoonfeed your dumb ignorant flippant ass.

>>10543696
Which is more likely

1. a series of incredible scientific breakthroughs that allow us to dramatically reduce the timescales and resources needed to manage the one million issues involved with the terraforming of Mars to become an Earth-like planet to level that it is actually feasible to our current or even thousands years in the future civilization

2. some unpredictable aspect of the universe is discovered through further research into quantum mechanics which makes faster-than-light travel possible today. As in "holy shit, start building the first interstellar space port within a year from now" kind of discovery.

I believe the second one is actually much more likely and a better thing for civilization to pursue. Fuck Mars. Earth 2 is already out there waiting for us.

>muh atmosphere

>>10543696
>I don’t see why we can’t and why we shouldn’t.

>>10549200
what are you even talking about

>>10543817
lmao , no thanks we don't to see Mars ending up being swarmed by giant niggers .

>>10553407
So you can't back up your claims. You only think a magnetosphere is required because at some point you've gone "well I guess that sounds reasonable" and then you've called it a day.

>>10553688
I'm not going to spoonfeed you you dolt. I have the pages of my "beliefs" right in front of me. If you're to oblivious to use the Internet and mend your ways, I ain't helping. Nigger.

>>10543696
>I mean, I don’t see why we can’t
we can't even control our own climate that is already near perfect. We can't predict it either.

>>10546341
>humans have already discovered all the science
Gee where have we heard this before?

>>10553727
>>10553688
Well that was a good debate
>I'm not going to show why you're wrong because you're wrong!

>>10553787
I never used the word "wrong" in any of my previous posts. Do you even shitpost?

>>10544753
The real point of colonizing Mars is to leave the undesirables behind on Earth. Antarctica doesn't provide that benefit. But I agree there is an easier solution here on Earth: genocide.

How long did it take for Mars to lose its atmosphere? Days? Years? Centuries? If the time span was long enough, wouldn't regeneration be an ongoing option to keep it in place?

>>10543696
Terraforming Mars is not possible with current technology. There just isn't enough readily available CO2

>>10552202
It's all speculation.

>>10553490
What's this.

>>10549127
>>10549200
I could imagine catalytic precipitation of the atmosphere.
releasing tons and tons of nano particular catalysts able to convert sulphuric acid into elemental sulphur and water and CO2 into some form of graphite or organic matter and oxygen
High temperature and pressure is ideal for it
I would sent some kind of automatic factories or nanomachines to make these catalysts from minerals on surface and release them from there into atmosphere to do their work.
Once the pressure drops significantly, you can shade the planet with mirror network or solar array to reflect sun rays and cool the planet
Once the temperature drops, you can release GMO organisms to eat the primordial sludge that snowed-out and shit out usable biomass and finally terraform it.

>>10543696
Like it or not, we will be living through augmented realty before we have the technology to Terra-form mars. why make a planet suit us when we can make our mortal coils suit the planet.

>>10555344
Wrong!

>>10543696
How much would adding an ocean to Mars change it? Not in terms of supporting life.
Like some of the water would come from the poles, but to get an ocean you'd need to add a lot of outside water from asteroids and comets. All that mass added to one hemisphere is bound to affect the gravity, rotation, tilt, etc.

>>10556508
Terraforming isn't real.

>>10556564
Sure it is. You just need to redirect a lot of icy asteroids/comets and wait a few million years.

>>10556575
Kek
I know right? Or just move the sun closer.

>>10553479
The first one.

>>10553737
>he thinks science fiction is real

Good luck with that orbital ring, kid.

>>10557455
>Star Trek communicators

>>10557900
They had radio in the 60's. This isn't as big as people make it out to be, like subs in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, subs already existed at that time. In both situations a logical progression was made.

>>10554871
Its from the Battle Angel Alita manga.

>>10543696
humans have been involuntarily terraforming Earth since the industrial revolution, and the combined efforts of billions of individuals have resulted in a net temperature increase of approx. 1 degree centigrade

if you think we're going to melt the ice caps on Mars and fill it with breathable air any time in the next 1000 years, you're huffing glue

>>10554054
The best greenhouse gas is water vapor, not CO2. Water can be readily sourced from comets flying around the solar system, nudge enough of them towards mars and you're done with the terraforming.

>>10558660
That's like carrying water to the ocean, no pun intended. What Mars lacks is a strong enough magnetic field.

>>10546553
>information on how absurd terraforming Mars is
>Humans *require* a full g of gravity to exist!
>The only way to get a full g is to make Mars have the same mass as Earth
>Therefore we must crash every other moon in the solar system into Mars
>Lol how ridiculous!

>>10553730
Someone's it's easier to build a new house than it is to renovate an old one.

Especially when the old one is filled with unruly houseguests.

>>10558703
All these non-arguments. What are you really saying?

>>10543696

Horseshit meatbag fantasy.

Turn that useless chunk of rock into a Jupiter Brain and be done with it.

>>10543696
Why not? Money.

There is no way to convince governments to invest in something that, if it ever pays off, will take centuries to do so. Private industry won't be interested either, if they can't see an immediate ROI.

To be fair, that's probably what they said back in the 16th and 17th centuries about developing the Americas.

>>10558724
Okay, let me translate that out of green text sarcasm. The image I replied to proposed that Step #1 of "terraforming" Mars would be to smash every other moon and asteroid in the system into it, so that it has the same mass as Earth and thus the same gravity. Presumably this is an intentionally absurd argument. I disagreed with that point for the following reasons:
1) Humans don't necessarily need 1g gravity in order to survive, or even to reproduce. As someone else in the thread noted, research in this field is limited to comparison between full gravity and microgravity, with very little information about what's in between.
2) The idea of increasing gravity by increasing the mass of the planet is basically the least efficient way to do it possible. So now it's arguing that we need to do something unnecessary AND must do it in the worst way possible.

That's what I'm saying. Now look, I don't personally believe that Mars will ever be so thoroughly terraformed that it will be indistinguishable from Earth. But I do think that a significant number of humans will live and work on its surface, and that we will probably see increases in both atmosphere density and surface temperature as a result.

>>10543817
What would decompose them?

>>10552319
w8. While our genetic engineering is crude, we still can make it work, as long as we have adequate base organism (some sort of cyanobacterium) and a set of of enzymes taken from other procaryotes.
I think we can make several strains of sufficiently extremophilic bacteria capable of fixation of organogenic elements and working as a primitive ecosystem.
Martian soil being toxic may complicate that, and we may not find organisms capable of living in irradiated bleach.
And while on Earth stuff like Great oxigenation took millions of years, using highly evolved versions of metabolic paths may or may not shave a order of magnitude or two.
On the other hand, fucking Antarctica is a lush paradise compared to Mars, so slower metabolism would add several orders of magnitude to required time. In addition, while you can change the composition of the atmosphere, it would do fuck all pressure.

Where would the water come from?

>>10555295
Logical, I like it. My thought was to vent the atmosphere to space somehow, but without some way to divert it to a different orbit or make a small moonlet out of it, eventually it would all just fall back to the planet. Venus still has the problem of super slow rotation though.

>>10543696
When do you think Humanity will finally start exploring space.

>>10543696
Mars is too small to hold an atmosphere for a long time, also the soil is filled with a bunch of toxic compounds

>>10550717
Space stations are for bugmen and chinks.

One word
ClimateChange
When will we ever do this properly?
Nice pipe dream though.

>>10543696
The Moon is a much better candidate for terraformation.

>>10559705
Never, space is to hostile for humans. It will be engineered life forms that colonize space.

>>10559807
How?

>>10543747
This, plus our evolution was shaped by Earth's gravity, there would be effects on our health living in 1/3 of Earth's gravity

>>10560944
Create underground colonies where gravity is more suitable and only have alien plant life on the surface. We can be like dwarves.

>>10560957
gravity only increases underground on Earth because of the inner core density, and even then you have to go several kilometers down to feel a change of no more than 10%. Tripling the gravity you feel by going underground is not possible on Earth and certainly not possible on Mars.

>>10558767
>t.

>>10561401
he moves like one of them

>>10560944
I don't get this shit, the muscle mass we're no longer putting to work may atrophy but I don't see what real deal-breaking problems this will cause for a colonial population that is 99% likely to never return to a 1G environment anyway. Life adapting to new conditions is not a very outlandish concept.

>>10558767
>That's what I'm saying. Now look, I don't personally believe that Mars will ever be so thoroughly terraformed that it will be indistinguishable from Earth. But I do think that a significant number of humans will live and work on its surface, and that we will probably see increases in both atmosphere density and surface temperature as a result.
This is exactly how I see it. Even if we take such a project seriously and pour tons of resources into it, it will still take such a long time that human populations will likely adapt to the intermediate conditions and simply halt the process voluntarily, or we'll just hit a wall and decide to make do with what we have.
>>10559807
Mars at least has enough mass to maintain a semblance of an atmosphere and a reasonably Earth-like day/night cycle, can't say the same for the moon.

>>10549310
>ballet heeled mars fetish colony
hot

>>10561475
Jell-O babies.

You seem to forget the fact that it would be monumentally stupid and largely useless. What benefits could terraforming a planet in the SAME FUCKING STAR bring?

>>10561841
Population dump. I think a permanent base on Ceres would be more useful than a permanent colony on Mars or Venus, but I digress. Luna should be kept as a nature reserve-like thing since occupying it would be stupendously pointless. Other moons like Europa, Charon, or Deimos would just be too hard for permanent settlement, although I could see a science-lab settlement on Europa just like we have in Antarctica now, just in the distant future.

>>10561830
But in what environment? That's the question I'm asking.
>>10561841
Because around the SAME FUCKING STAR it's feasible for LARGE FUCKING AMOUNTS OF PEOPLE to travel as >>10561854 already stated. That's not to say extrasolar colonies are useless, but interplanetary travel is definitely a development that should be encouraged.

>>10561841
It'll happen, if for no other reason than that people want to move there. You'd rather live in your O'Neill Cylinder orbiting the L4? Go for it. But there's going to be people who want Mars, if for no other reason than to be ornery.

>>10553899
Millions of years.

let's start with the Sahara desert m8. Baby steps.

>>10562430
don't you need 2 planets to terraform fake people

>>10552202
There is a gigantic difference between zero G and 40% G.

It's absolutely possible that it may actually be good for human health. Less strain on everything inside you.

>>10543916
>too cold
Lots of geothermal heat from tidal forces on the Galilean moons.
>>10544074
Jupiter has a pretty nice magnetosphere...

>>10561854
>Population dump.
Oh, yeah, terraforming another planet is the way to go. Family planning? Hell no; educating people is too expensive. Let's just terraform another planet.

>>10561873
>because we want to
I can appreciate the honesty. Doesn't make it more useful, though.

>>10562678
You can't force education on people. The US started public education nearly a century ago, but it still has a peasant-minded underclass. Nigeria has no idea what even is family planning. China legislated it but will soon have an age crisis. Unless we start mass-sterilization on a planetary scale, population control is less feasible than colonizing (not necessarily terraforming) another planet.

>So, what are your thoughts on this?

3rd world Earth, 1st world Mars.

Gravity aside, a big solar eruption would kill anyone living on the surface.
The alternative is living underground or be absolutely certain you will notice the alarm and able to run to the nearest shelter in 20 minutes.
While on Earth people would just notice some funny lights in the sky.

>>10543696
Best art of Terraform Mars.

>>10562828
No.

>>10561401
The fuck is going in?

>>10565861
tear gas

>>10558763
The same could be said about the most expensive projects in history.

>>10559736
Good thing long times don't matter whatsoever to humans. We don't give a fuck about a million years from now.

Mars wins!

>>10565392
t. buttmad Earther

Why do angry? Was your welfare check late?

>>10552624
Show me a planet that has an atmosphere suitable to life that doesn't have a magnetosphere.

>>10565861
That is a depiction of someone who grew up in Mars' partial gravity.

>>10566078
>this Earther cope
Sad!

>>10566179
>Earther

Stanford Torus Space Settlement Master Race

>>10566046
Venus, Titan

You do not necessarily need a magnetosphere to retain thick atmosphere.

On Mars you do because it has such a low mass, however this only applies on geological timescales. Terraform Mars and you are good to go for thousands of years, magnetosphere or not.

Also you seem to think magnetosphere is needed for radiation shielding (GCR and solar). Nope, thick atmosphere would do that.

>>10562828
This. Humans need genetic bottlenecks in order to not degenerate. Leaving Africa and colonizing inhospitable northern areas was one such bottleneck in the past. Space colonization will be another.

>>10566315
>he doesn't know IQ rises as regional development increases
At least put some effort into your bait, not just post some random image from your /pol/ folder.

Define terraform. Is a planet "terraformed" when it supports a biosphere with complex Earth based life and has a breathable atmosphere for baseline humans?

>>10566428
Regional development has nothing to do with genetic bottlenecks.

>>10566428
IQ does rise with social development, but this can only do so much to offset the degradation due to demographic changes. It is a bandaid, not a solution. Flynn effect is already slowing down and even reversing.

>>10566438
>Is a planet "terraformed" when it supports a biosphere with complex Earth based life and has a breathable atmosphere for baseline humans?
If use that definition then Antarctica is terraformed, which makes sense since it is Earth, but there are obvious ways we can improve it. For example we could meet it's glaciers by raising the global temperature.

I suppose we need to explicitly state that a world can be considered terraformed even if it can be terraformed further

>>10566428
IQ has increased when considered in isolated regions, but decreases when considered globally. It is an example of Simpson's paradox.

>Simpson's paradox (or Simpson's reversal, Yule–Simpson effect, amalgamation paradox, or reversal paradox[1]) is a phenomenon in probability and statistics, in which a trend appears in several different groups of data but disappears or reverses when these groups are combined.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox

>>10566507
Not applicable. You are conflating differences in region with differences over time.

>>10566601
It is applicable as the paradox generally applies to any correlation, not just a temporal ones.

If we can allegedly terraform a planet, why can't we fix global warming, desertification, deforestation etc?

Checkmate terraformfags

>>10548871
Damn mate you sure destroyed him with that reasoning and logic

>>10566628
Well I was referring to the increase in IQ over time regardless of any region. How one region compared to another doesn't matter because the rule of IQ increasing with time and development regardless.

>>10566769
Because none of those are real.

>>10543696
Fuck off Mars shill. Venus is a much better terraforming candidate. Just bombard it with hydrogen for a while and you get rid of most of it's shitty atmosphere while also covering like 80% of it's surface with oceans. Scoop the hydrogen from Jupiter or Saturn, or hell even set up a mining outpost in their upper atmosphere and you've got all the materials you'll ever need, fuel included. And on that note, even prior to terraforming you can just live in floating habitats in Venus' upper atmosphere without even needing to worry about pressurization. Ride the winds around the planet and you don't have to worry about it's slow rotation. Plenty of sunlight during the day for growing food and powering shit, as well as wind for wind power. Not to mention you could use it as a halfway point for setting up a dyson swarm factory on Mercury.

>>10566769
terraforming is a shotgun approach that doesn't necessarily create a perfectly Earth-like environment despite what the name implies

terraformed Mars would require just as many impossible degrees of micromanagement to maintain stable conditions over hundreds of years of industrialization as Earth will

>>10544843
this.

>>10567864
mars already has an atmosphere dumbass

>>10567753
this too

>>10567871
A negligibly thin atmosphere. Mars lacks the mass to retain a substantial thicker atmosphere in the absence of any new gasses being added. The only reason mars had a thicker atmosphere in the past was because of tectonic activity.

>>10567871
Which continues to get blasted into space to this day.

>>10567878
>>10567885
atmosphere loss occurs on just about every terrestrial body in the solar system and the rate is negligible over the human timescales even without active geology to replenish it as we have on Earth

regardless of this, the effort required to lob comets and set up surface systems to enhance the Martian atmosphere and replenish volatiles as far less than the effort required to transport massive amounts of materials between the outer and inner systems + getting rid of shitloads of venusian carbon + designing trustworthy bubblehabs that people would want to live in despite the whole "one particularly bad fuckup and the whole city freefalls into actual unironic hell" inconvenience

>>10567885
If a breathable atmosphere can be added then obviously then we can replace it at the geological rate it is loss. I shouldn't have to tell you this.

>>10567753
This is the most retarded post I've read all day. Granted I've been at work.

Terraforming Venus requires borderline magic on account of the ridiculous insulation its atmosphere provides. Mars requires mirrors and nitrogen.

There's a reason it doesn't have an atmosphere

>>10567949
see >>10567906 >>10567934
why do so many people think terraforming a body is something that absolutely needs to be viable on billion-year timescales without any human intervention or maintenance

>>10567986
Because after the inevitable collapse of human society it would be nice to know the life we bring over there won't just die in a billion years but will continue evolving, leaving our solar system a better place than it was before

>>10567943
>Terraforming Venus requires borderline magic on account of the ridiculous insulation its atmosphere provides.
Congrats, you didn't read the post, much less comprehend the ideas behind it.

>>10543696
Funding anon
You can't just say "Let's Terraform mars!" without a plan
You'd need to go in good detail on how to create a magnetic field, an atmosphere and water.
You'd also need proof that your plan would work, and a detailed paper showig how much it would cost.

Investors and the goverment doesn't just invest in random shit, that has no plan or no proof it will even work

>>10568003
even life on Earth won't last that long, but perhaps transplanted and specially engineered life would persist in unicellular/extremophile forms for a very long time afterwards
>>10568007
even if you read the post it's still AIDS inducingly over optimistic

>>10568021
people with enterprise grade autism have been writing detailed proposals and papers on the subject for quite some time

>>10568024
something tells me those papers are shit

>>10568022
>even life on Earth won't last that long
Nigga we've been through 5 major mass extinctions with the 6th well underway courtesy of yours truly, it would take something on the level of a literal planetary impact or a particularly large star shitting itself in our direction to completely sterilize a planet of multicellular life.

>>10568028
pretty much, we talk a good game about terraformation but not how we're going to build the infrastructure to facilitate it
>>10568044
>or a particularly large star shitting itself in our direction to completely sterilize a planet of multicellular life.
well fuck I'll be damned if we don't have one just a few light-minutes away... and it's not getting any dimmer ;v)

>>10568060
>well fuck I'll be damned if we don't have one just a few light-minutes away
Yes and that won't be going off for another 4-5 billion years. >>10568003 only said a billion years.
Not to mention even a quarter of that time is far more than enough for another intelligent species to spring up in some bumfuck corner of the tree of life. Sure as hell didn't take us that long and we had to wait for multicellular life to get it's shit together in the first place before we could even start.

>>10568044
DNA is destroyed by UV radiation, so it'd be enough if our magnetic field vanished into thin air
anything less than that though, and we'd keep banging each other like there's no tomorrow

>>10568072
>only said a billion years.
so am I, stars grow steadily brighter over time and the Earth will likely be rendered uninhabitable long before the Sun actually leaves the main sequence

the point is just that naturally sustained life in our solar system is finite no matter what you do, but the thousands of years offered by a temporary solution is still plenty of time to figure out something more self-sustaining if we really decide that such a thing is important

>>10560944
lol just build a bunch of these

>>10568089
UV rays are blocked by water and mitigated by a number of biological adaptations.

>>10568003
That's a nice thought. No matter what we would a have done to Earth, at least we spread life.

I like to think of humanity as Earth's one hope and reproducing, or abiogenesis on a cosmic scale.

>>10568044
>courtesy of yours truly
How many times have I told you not to commit ecological genocide?

>>10543696
>Can't get rid of dessert on Terra.
>Wants to terraform mars.

Pathetic.

We're marsforming terra nowaday's, first you need to reverse that proccess.

>>10568879
Desserts are an important part of the global biosphere. They provide nutrients to the world via the dust that reaches the upper atmosphere.

>>10568983
Okey, now account this nutrients to % of nutrients in common forrest and in greenhouse crops.

"nuttrients" like, dude that dust is basically sand, sand is medium, not nutrients.

>>10568879
>marsforming terra
Should be Tyrforming Earth, Latin scum. Also we aren't, we're Freyforming Earth. There's a huge difference.

>>10567432
Damn dude, you rekt him with that argument

>>10560944
You have to realize that by the time we can terraform mars effectively we will be very good at genetic engineering, we'd really realistically only need to terraform the planet a small amount before we could send up gengineered martians to live there while it gets fully terraformed, or wherever we decide to stop.

>>10569068
Thanks

>>10543696
>terraforming a whole fucking planet before setting up a cluster of large aircraft-like structures in the atmosphere of another planet
>this other planet is also much closer and has similar g to earth
>thinking magnetosphere issues are "fixable"
>actually not see any issues with all of this shit

You have a tattoo of Musk on your right ass cheek too? Or that one Nasa sweater which makes you think you are "an amateur astronomer".

Fix distribution of wealth on earth.
Fix distribution of food on earth.
Fix distribution of energy on earth.

The rest will come naturally.

>>10568987
Look up ocean iron seeding or how Australia is devoid of phosphorus for lush plant growth except around volcanic regions. Erosion is very important to the biosphere. Dessert dust is a major source of nutrients for the particularly isolated party's of the ocean.

>>10569506
What value to the interplanetary economy does Venus hold? Mars has actually accessible minerals and water and a low gravity to relatively easily get into orbit.

>>10543696
It's possible. The new Nasa twin study makes it possible. Making colonization in Mars possible.

>>10569506
yeah bro fuck it let's just keep strip mining the earth, destroying the environment, overcrowding our cities and fighting countless politically motivated wars until we eventually fix all of these fundamentally unfixable problems that could probably also be addressed somewhat by this thing we totally shouldn't be doing because it's wasting valuable money that could be sent to warlords and megacorporations instead

>>10544843
Sure. True. But it would still take millions of years for the terraformed atmosphere to degenerate to current levels, by which time we would either not care, or find ways to stop it from happening.
Even the moon could hold down an atmosphere for thousands of years.

>>10569506

Your daily reminder that both Venus colony and magnetosphere are memes. Venus is a shitty place for a colony due to lack of resources and being an inhospitable hell with a deep gravity well. Magnetosphere is not required for radiation protection, atmosphere does that. Magnetosphere can protect the atmosphere from being blown off by solar wind, but this is only relevant on geological timescales.

>>10571555
Cope

>>10569506
>Fix the distribution of wealth
Yeah, bro! When high school dropouts can't support a family of four on a single income, the system is clearly broken!

>>10571555
This.

The ironic thing is that Venus doesn't even have an internal magnetic dynamo. All it has is an ionosphere.

>>10553795
>I-I was just shitposting I swear!

>>10572007
I wasn't

>>10571555
Checked

The whole Venus thing seems so strange to me because in effect all youre making is a space station, right? You cant fuck with the surface of the planet, and unlike on Mars, where we can build structures on solid ground, if something goes wrong in your cloud city on Venus youre going to descend into a literal hell with no hope for survival.

>hopefully one day humans will find a way to make a manned trip to Venus

That would actually be pretty cool

>>10543819
The field strength isn't the issue, it's making it large enough to actually be useful outside of the local frame it exists. The Earth's magnetic field is fucking huge.

>>10573598
Advantage of Venus cloud city is that it's out of reach of the law on Earth and Mars. Belters will stop there making run back to Mars and Earth and there will be plenty of semi-legal entertainments to amuse them and take their spacebucks.

>not combining every single last moon, asteroid, comet and terrestrial planet (i.e. Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars) and dwarf planet (Pluto and company) into one super mega Earth planet.
>you’re not gonna make it.

>>10543696
I mean there's water on Mars.

>>10549127
Mars, at least shown signs that it once supported life, and could possibly support life again if we wanted too.

>>10573887
>Mom, a volcano ate my tendies, and I can't move since my body fused all my joints into solid bone in response to the gravity.
Also, I don't know about you, but I don't have a billion years to wait for a planet to cool down.
>>10573598
While an unterraformed Venus is a hell trap, this could work somewhere like Saturn, or with enough cyborg implants or King Kai's training, Jupiter. Where the planet side bases serve mostly as a sort of capital for the moons. Any city designed to float on Saturn wouldn't fall very far in case of a failure, and would hopefully be engineered to withstand the pressure just in case (since it's atmosphere isn't made of destroyeverythingium and it tends to stay cooler than the boiling point of iron, or even water for that matter), and Saturn's gravity isn't that bad. Jupiter potentially has a liquid-metallic hydrogen core which would be great for study. Although Jupiter has the problem of mach-force winds, crushing gravity, and unless a miracle in architectural engineering is achieved the atmosphere will crush any "floating city" long before it has time to worry about Jove's blazing heart. But the gas giants all have two major resources needed for major space colonization, H and He, one resource we've already passed peak production of and the other of which we'd be better served by leaving on Earth since we need it to live in general.

>>10568218
>tfw you forget to go to the gravitron one day and you lose all your gains

>>10543696
Too much money and times for not enough return on investments.

>>10573887
>finally free ourselves from the confines of Earth with an endless universe to live in
>hey, lets chain an even bigger ball to our leg!

The future is orbital habitats, engineered to have perfect environment for inhabitants. Even Mars, while a good starting point for initial space colonies, is a dead end.

Why don't we just send the cosmonauts to Europa?

>>10546341
>humans need 1g
We really don't know that. All we know is that 0g is bad. Even lunar gravity could be sufficient for human life. There's been next to zero research done into how much gravity humans require, and there won't be for awhile. The ISS is possibly coming down in four years, and even if it's extended, it'd take a lot of time and money to build, launch, assemble, and install an artificial gravity module. It'd be better to build an entirely new station, but there are no real plans for such a thing.

>>10548955
Both the mass and core are problems. The magnetosphere can be hypothetically provided by a machine at the Sun-Mars L1. The mass is much more difficult. By the time we even remotely have the ability to add mass to Mars we could probably restart the nuclear reaction in its core. For now the realistic solution is enclosed habitats, and potentially building a magnetosphere generator depending on the scale ofo ur colonization.

>>10549184
Nobody knows. Write your congressman and ask for funding for an artificial gravity habitat in space.

>>10576675
It's astronauts. You Eastern Europoor scum.

>>10551865
We really don't know at all.

>>10561854
>Luna should be kept as a nature reserve-like thing since occupying it would be stupendously pointless.
It's much easier to go from the Moon's surface to LEO than from Earth's surface to LEO. For that reason, it would be highly advantageous to mine fuel, water, and metals from the Moon and send them to LEO for assembly.

>>10566078
Oh yeah, I forgot about that time we birthed and reared babies in varying levels of gravity and observed the results.

>>10576778
Source

>>10576701
>All we know is that 0g is bad.
0g is bad if you have to return to the surface, and even then you just need time to recover when you get here. NASA released the twin study, nothing per se permanently negative occurs, and there are some benefits.

>>10577113
He's being sarcastic.
>>10576770
Or we could just launch from HEO to LEO. And drag asteroids into orbit for mining. Also I'm pretty sure the moon has no water.

>>10576701
>We really don't know that. All we know is that 0g is bad.

You think it is a switch that gets flipped? It will be a curve, like >>10566078

>>10543696
It's not that we shouldn't terraform Mars, it's that we can't.

Fortunately we don't have to terraform a planet to colonize it.

>>10577282
>it's that we can't.
??? Why not? On the long scale (permanent) of terraformation of Mars the hardest part is "reigniting" the core. Which will boost the magnetosphere enough to retain a stronger atmosphere. Venus has the opposite issue, the core will have to be quelled to eliminate the ongoing greenhouse effect from coming back. The next hurdle is creating the atmosphere. On Mars this is a lot simpler (assuming you have 500m-1.5g years to waste), adding more water, or not (there might already be enough for this) and then introducing hardy photo and chemosynthetic plants, fungi, bacteria, protists, and archeobacteria that can withstand the initially high doses of radiation, thin atmosphere, and iron-rich/phosphate-poor soil will naturally create an atmosphere that is more suitable for life as we know it (which is how it happened on Earth) over the course of several hundred million years, all while the magnetosphere is growing. On Venus the issue is a lot worse, first the planet's pH must be neutralized, because adding water as is would be pointless since it would just boil to the upper atmosphere and become too acidic for any usable (in the sense of terraformation) lifeform to use. The simplest way would be to literally blast it [large portions of the atmosphere] off, during which large amounts of water can be added by slamming an SI fuckton of ice-comets into it, Venus has more gravity so while the planet is cooling back off from the bombardment that destroyed most of it's previous atmosphere it should hold onto the water vapor, should, it might not. Deacidifying it (and pacifying the rampant vulcanism) is the most important step, my solution to the former is just dumping zinc and chlorine onto the planet. To the latter, some sort of "sunshade" is needed, my (very hairbrained) idea for this is to tow Ceres into Veneran L3, maybe then Venus can cool down. cont'd

>>10577689
About one billion years in... Mars has a biosphere, an atmosphere, shallow oceans, and maybe even developed it's very own land-colonizers. Venus, unless it has undergone abiogenesis, is a lifeless planet with a toxic (but not ultrainhospitable) atmosphere, and massive oceans (now with even larger tides everytime the sun rises). On Mars we can start placing the animals and more advanced plants we think we'll need. On Venus we can jump straight past the atmosphere fixing and populate the oceans which shouldn't be anywhere as toxic, and place machines to clean the air. 100m later (being sure to genocide any potential rival sapient creatures that have popped up) and we can start living on either planet. Which will seem pointless to the AI that has overseen all this as the descendants of our species have already evolved to live in a multitude of gravities and severe radiation because of being spaceborne for around a billion years or so, and could by now have just been genetically or cybernetically altered to live on the planets as they originally were. But the AI, being a soulless AI just does as intended and grows some H. Sapiens out of ancient DNA analysis and plops them down. Maybe the AI becomes a benevolent deity to them, maybe the AI just fucks off and Von Neumanns the galaxy, who knows? Not the humans that will one day discover they have no fossil record.

Develop dome habitats in Antarctica first before attempting anything on Mars.

>>10577689
>Why not?

Because: >>10546341

Why change the entire planet when you can make far more space colonies with far more "land" than you could ever be able to do on Mars, if terraforming Mars was even something humans could ever do, using a fraction of a fraction of the resources?

>>10577154
>Also I'm pretty sure the moon has no water.
We are pretty sure it has at least some. Exactly how much, and how much is water ice at the bottom of craters and how much is hydroxyl groups is unclear.

>>10577272
>You think it is a switch that gets flipped?
I don't know. There has been no research. You're assuming a linear correlation, which is an incredibly large assumption to make. That could be the case, or it could have a non-linear correlation of some kind. Or the body could function normally in partial gravity until a point where there's not enough force to maintain structure, and then health drops off. Low gravity could be bad for pregnancy, but fine for adults, or even children. We just don't know.

>>10577689
>the hardest part is "reigniting" the core.
Hardest kek. Dats bretty hard bro.
I don't even give shit anymore, I'm glad that people are interested in exploring Mars again, and if terraform fantasies are what it takes to get retards hyped then by all means.

Cool blog post

>>10543696
Sounds great anon! Lets terraform all the asteroids while we're at it. Oooh, and lets terraform Saturn too!

>>10543696
Mars hasn't got enough gravity to hold an earth-like atmosphere. If you did terraform Mars, it wouldn't last.

>>10577831
We want raw resources and mining asteroids is too ephemeral until it actually happens.

>>10579295
We know, anon, we know but this is a lets play pretend thread.

>>10543696
I like the smell of perchlorates in the grass

>>10579525
Okay

>>10579269
You are being ironic, but the truly ironic thing is that terraformation first referred to asteroids.

>>10579295
>Oh no, this island will sink in one hundred thousand years! We can't colonize that!
Come on now.

>>10580726
But he's right.

>>10581210
No he's not.

Orbulon regrets to inform that terraforming is both unrealistic and impractical. Colonizing space itself would be much a better option, and the planets and asteroids can be harnessed for a near infinite amount of resources.

>>10582659
If we attempt to terraform Mars now. It will take three centuries.

Artificial magnetosphere at la grange point. Possible with today's technology, releases frozen co2 in feedback loop.

> As a result, Mars atmosphere would naturally thicken over time, which lead to many new possibilities for human exploration and colonization. According to Green and his colleagues, these would include an average increase of about 4 °C (~7 °F), which would be enough to melt the carbon dioxide ice in the northern polar ice cap. This would trigger a greenhouse effect, warming the atmosphere further and causing the water ice in the polar caps to melt.

>>10579302
Mining asteroids is a more sound plan then trying to colonize a new planet for mineral rights.

>>10583536
neat!

>>10583536
Or we could just rely on the ionosphere like Venus does.

>>10585235
Okay.

>>10585235
Wait, really? Source on this?

>>10586372
Just read the Wikipedia page about Venus. It doesn't have a geomagnetic dynamo and yet it has the densest terrestrial world atmosphere in the solar system. That's because the very solar radiation that could blow off the atmosphere actually charges it, creating an ionosphere which can deflect further radiation.

How the composition of Venus atmosphere plays a significant part or if any sufficiently sense atmosphere can pull it off, I don't know.

>>10586372
>>10586727
Following up after refreshing myself and reading a bit more; Venus loses more atmosphere than Earth; comparable to Mars, but loses mostly hydrogen, oxygen, and helium. The dense atmosphere of CO2 is safe and replenished by volcanism.

Closing Statement, a terraformed Mars may have a geologically slow rate of atmospheric loss due in part a protective ionosphere, it might not be at all significant. We don't know.

Theoretically we could both heat Mars and create an atmosphere by focusing the obviously necessary orbital mirrors onto a single point on the surface. Sufficient power per square meter would release CO2 from the rocks. They would be like artificial volcanoes, or perhaps a cooler term, atmosphere forges. Such a method would provide a limitless source of atmosphere.

The problem or course would be that even when converted to oxygen by a biosphere, the CO2 levels would be toxic without a buffer gas like nitrogen, which Mars has virtually none of.

>>10543696
https://youtu.be/xjf7LkNXuWI

>>10586992
Living with oxygen supplies is far easier than living without atmospheric pressure. People on Earth live with supplemental oxygen today. I've seen a guy skiing on supplemental oxygen. It's inconvient and you'd probably need a full mask to pressurize it on Mars, but it's much easier than having to have a pressure vessel for your entire body.

>>10587792
Actually it would be easier than that. With enough partial pressure of oxygen, you could theoretically survive on the surface of Mars exposed to the elements with just a heavy jacket and a CO2 scrubbing mask.

The economy would ultimately be more complex than this, but it could be theoretically as simple as dolin our calcium carbonate laden masks to everyone and then dumping used up calcium carbonate into the atmospheric forges to bake out the CO2 again and reuse.

>>10543696
It’s in the habitable zone?

>>10589228
Yes.

>>10578242
>You're assuming a linear correlation, which is an incredibly large assumption to make

That's pretty much how everything works. Ever get drunk before? Same thing. Drink more, get drunker, smoothbrain.

>>10543696
>Terraform Mars

Complete sci-fi rubbish.

>>10589281
>damming rivers
>irrigate thousands of square kilometers
>getting people into space
>greenhouse complexes that can be seen from space
Complete sci-fi rubbish.

>>10543696
>Also, since humans are great at using fossil fuels, using it on Mars at first to warm it up would actually be a very good idea
where the fuck are the fossils on mars you mega faggot? also you sound like a massive faggot talking to his mom about astronauts and the solar system

>>10544198
the roaches look like obunga

>>10553874
What would you do once we left?

>>10546341
>Life for humans on Earth will come to an end, but life itself on Earth will adapt
why wont humans adapt too?

>>10575816
Where did you hear that Mars used to have life? We'll wait

>>10568218
you would have to kinda stand up on the seats to simulate real gravity though. was rippen really just a genius trying to colonize planets?

>>10576732
Fuck you. Are they explorers of cosmos or astros?
Checkmate.

Realistically we'll probably go extinct or civilization will regress either socially or technologically before we have a chance to get to another planet.

>>10589329
>thinking humanity has done anything at all to terraform Earth.
>thinking that equates to terraforming Mars

you have no fucking clue what you are talking about. You live on a diet of science fiction horseshit.

>>10589346
humanity isn't adapting their bodies. we are adapting some tech, but that won't help maintain humanity. Life is change.

>>10589506
Learn to type first if you want people to take your ideas seriously. If you don't care about your posts then we certainly won't.

>>10589527
>seething

lol

>>10543696
dibs on the small island on the bottom right

>>10589527
>>>/b/

>>10589279
>everything has a linear correlation
Are you retarded? Why are you even on /sci/?

>>10589755
Ah, yes, /b/, the board where taking pride in one's posts is of paramount importance.

>>10589943
>assuming everything is linear
Maybe he's a physicist.

>>10543696
Making earth safe place to survive longer would be cheaper.

I think it's plausible that we find a way to transcend our loving requirements before we are able to create or reach a planet like Earth.

Bio-modifications or a non-organic recreation of the brain. We might become something else before we ever leave Earth.

>>10590832
Por que no los dos?

>>10590832
Quality control dictates that was take the choice of avoiding the error out of the hands of the operator. In this case the operator is humanity and the error is human extinction.

>>10590832
It's already safe enough to survive. Now it's time to aim for something better and less destructive.

>>10589506
You have no fucking clue what you are talking about.

>>10590898
I've already transcended my loving requirements.

>>10592571
Good for you.

>>10590898

It's entirely possible.

>>10592992
how so?

>>10543696
It's a nice idea, but I think it's far more realistic for robots to be human's emissaries into space. I think you could have short term habitation units for humans.

I think if you want humans living outside of earth, a massive spacestation or colony ship with artifical gravity is actually going to be our best bet, ideally supplied by planetary based automated industry on mars.

Maybe some of that excess industry could be diverted towards synthetic atmosphere and applying whatever gravity solution our space station would be using on a planetary scale.

It's too far in the future to really make conjecture about. For now, like it or not, the earth is where we make our stand.

maybe elon wil gonna start Terraforming after landing on mars