/sci/ - Science & Math

Here's another one.

Days on mars are 24 hours and 43 minutes long.

How would we make the calendar match that of Earth?

Or would we come up with a completely new one?

Mars, at its current mass and with its lack of a magnetic field cannot be made permanently habitable.

It also has 1/3rd the gravity of Earth, which may lead to health problems among colonists.

The best you can hope for is probably a few hundred thousand to a few million years of weak but breathable atmosphere.

You shouldn't need anything to produce heat artificially on Mars, once its got an atmosphere the greenhouse effect should become pronounced enough that liquid water is possible on the surface, although it'll still be markedly colder than Earth.

Water would most likely come from kuiper belt or oort cloud comets.

Radiation protection from the sun probably wouldn't be a significant concern on Mars. It's already further away from the sun, and a slightly thicker atmosphere might be all that's really necessary to keep people safe.

The planet will definitely use its own calendar system, probably in conjunction with an earth calendar.

Anyways OP, I just want to point out that cloud cities in the Venusian atmosphere are a superior colonization effort to Mars.

Rot in hell you fucking namefag

>>1987247
My friend and I were reading over your comment thinking how you know your shit, but then you started talking about Venus.

>Anyways OP, I just want to point out that cloud cities in the Venusian atmosphere are a superior colonization effort to Mars.

Cloud cities on Venus?

Do you have any idea how much radiation that planet gets just in one day?

You probably wouldn't live for more than a few decades IF THAT.

How did you come to this Venus cloud city hypothesis?

Any citations you can cite?

How would it work?

Give me info.

This is still a Mars thread though.

>>1987247
The lack of a magnetic field is a problem, yes, but not one that can't be mitigated by using dome habitats and restricting time spent outside.

As for surface water, simply heating up the planet should do the trick of coaxing it back onto the surface, however keeping it there requires pressure too. Those both can be accomplished by initiating a controlled greenhouse effect on the planet. This could be accomplished by sublimating the frozen CO2 around the poles in sufficient quantities that it stays planet-bound even in the face of solar wind.

The lower gravity shouldn't be an insurmountable problem, colonists will have more brittle bones, but this can partially be alleviated with exercise and proper diet. As for their eventual offspring, they will be taller and weaker (less muscle mass is needed for activity than on Earth. Conversely, Earth-born humans will have triple their strength on Mars) than Earth-born humans due to the lower gravity.

I hope this cleared up most points!

>>1987271
lulz, everyone save it and post it when you see him

>>1987281
I made that shoop.

I never thought it would bleed over to /sci/.

>>1987258
The Venusian atmosphere is the most earth-like place in our solar system.

Similar temperature and pressures exist between 50 and 60km altitude. Our atmosphere mixture is a lifting gas there as well - due to buoyancy. Same reason balloons and boats float. Combined with helium/hydrogen you can suspend some pretty heavy things, and you won't need a constant input of energy to do it.

The radiation itself isn't too much of a problem either. Venus has a weak magnetic field [not a geomagnetic field like Earth however] as well as an extensive atmosphere. A lot of the dangerous radiation is absorbed before it'll reach any colonies, and the colonies themselves aren't going to be open to the air anyways, so there'll be further protection from the structure itself.

To top it off, Venus has very similar gravity to Earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_Venus#Aerostat_habitats_and_floating_cities

>>1987291

2060 - Phobos undergoes detonations along key points to split into smaller kilometer-sized asteroids. Bombardment commences on North and South Martian poles. Debris shoots into space and then rains down across all of Mars, burning in it's thin atmosphere. Air pressure begins to rise, lakes and seas form over the course of a few months.

2080 - Asteroids from the asteroid belt are launched off to bombard Venus, causing much of the CO2 to be ejected. Kuiper Belt objects made primarily from ice are shielded lightly from the solar wind and then sent on their decade-long journey to Venus. Some lakes form, but begin to evaporate. Mining and construction droids in orbit above Venus begin cannibalizing leftover asteroids for materials to build a almost-completely enclosing shield, which tints to prevent most of the brunt of the solar wind and radiation from reaching Venus. Temperatures begin to lower, and Venus eventually starts getting lakes and seas.

Awwwhhh yeahhh the space program will be awesome.

Mars already has sufficient water at the poles and subsurface to sustain colonists for centuries.

The soil has an oxygen content of 40%, meaning the air could be refreshed by refining oxygen directly from the dirt. From the dirt!

Mars also contains the elements necessary for decent quality rocket fuel in abundance, as well as useful ores. Everything is present on Mars that would be necessary to start again, as a species, provided we had a head start before whatever planetary catastrophe annihilates earth.

With a mars colony that's properly equipped it could be fully self sufficient and expand over time, eventually producing it's own spacecraft. All that's needed is a starter colony, mines, foundries, that sort of thing. Once it's reached that point, we can breathe easy. No pun intended.

>>1987339

2070 Solar wind ionises new atmosphere, lowering the atmospheric density by stripping away atoms from the outer layer, particularly hydrogen, eliminating water from the environment.

2,000,000,080 Venus' core cools sufficiently to partially solidify and this heat loss allows seas and lakes to form...however by this time the Sun has problems of it's own...

>>1987347
>The soil has an oxygen content of 40%, meaning the air could be refreshed by refining oxygen directly from the dirt. From the dirt!

Just out of interest, if you applied lots of heat by... let's say burning lots and lots of asteroids in Mars' atmosphere, could you extract a sizable portion of this oxygen?

>>1987365
http://bigthink.com/ideas/24011
>Question One: If you terraform Mars, making it into a Garden of Eden, won't this be temporary, since Mars isn't big enough to permanently hold onto an atmosphere.

>Answer: You are absolutely correct. Mars is a small planet, and hence it's gravitational field is not strong enough to permanently hold onto a dense atmosphere, but it is sufficient to hold onto an atmosphere for thousands to millions of years, which is enough for us. Once we terraform Mars, there will be enough of an atmosphere to take of all our needs for generations to come.

>But it does mean that future generations, thousands of years from now, will have to replenish the atmosphere once again. For our purposes, however, it does not matter.

Oh, and as for Venus, why does it matter if Venus' core cools or not? The biggest problem it has is it's proximity to the sun and it's superthick CO2 atmosphere.

>>1987367

You're proposing we smelt Mars the rusty planet.
When it cools it would rust again.
Oxygen is volatile and must be constantly generated.
So if you know anyone working in the Brazilian logging industry...shoot them.

Go away namefags

>>1987381
>You're proposing we smelt Mars the rusty planet. When it cools it would rust again. Oxygen is volatile and must be constantly generated.
Just an idea. Asteroid-smacking would get enough CO2 out of the poles and such anyway even if it didn't work.
>So if you know anyone working in the Brazilian logging industry...shoot them.
I'm guessing this is a reference to a movie or book or something?

Humanity will never fool about with terraforming.
Having the mass of a planet just to generate gravity is a gross waste of resources.
Humanity, that is to say, Humanity's self replicating robots, will dismantle unsuitable planets like Venus & Mars and create solar orbiting habitats. These would be spun up to the correct gravity, fed the correct atmosphere...thus avoiding all that silly adaptive genetic engineering.

i hate these mars threads

we can barely make australia support the 20 odd million people who live there, though it's the size of india which supports over 50 times as many.

>>1987389

>must be constantly generated.

So stop fucking with the trees.

>>1987399
we can't even terraform earth lol

antarctica, siberia, north canada, are easy peasy compared to mars

>>1987394
>Humanity will never fool about with terraforming.
Pic related
>>1987399
>we can barely make australia support the 20 odd million people who live there, though it's the size of india which supports over 50 times as many.
Ausfag here, if the BEST technology we have available today was applied to NEED, and not the amount of spending power, Australia could easily support all 7 billion people. And I'm not even trolling.

>>1987405
>we can't even terraform earth lol
>terraform earth
>Earthform earth
Uh huh
>antarctica, siberia, north canada, are easy peasy compared to mars
Alright, raise them all to nice, 18'C temperatures. You just accidentally the whole equator.
And while smacking asteroids into Mars is beneficial for it's temperature, it is not beneficial for us. Y'know, just the whole problem of raining rock and metal burning up in Earth's atmosphere all over.

>>1987405

>>antarctica, siberia, north canada, are easy peasy compared to mars

And we live there, in science outposts the size of a small city on the inside. With a basketball court, gym, recreation room, sauna, hydroponic greenhouse, cafeteria and so on. Pic related.

>>1987399
what? isnt australia one of the fattest countries? pretty sure you're support 20 million pretty easy


theres a forum somewhere someone linked to which had someone who said they worked at nasa who wrote up a whole thing about how they would do it. sounds very plausible. someone find it. i couldnt

>>1987409
>earthform earth
clever and ironic phrases just die a death when retards don't see the joke and have to point them out to you.

>herp derp
so you think making the less hospitable parts of earth habitable is harder, per inhabitant, than terraforming mars?

>>1987422
water

been estimated that it's water can support 15 million and they are already over that

>>1987410
exactly, and it's damn easier than doing same on mars

>>1987410
One day I hope to see pic related.
>>1987429
>so you think making the less hospitable parts of earth habitable is harder, per inhabitant, than terraforming mars?
No, making less hospitable parts of Earth habitable will fuck up already habitable equatorial regions. And terraforming Mars... YOU'D HAVE AN ENTIRE BACKUP PLANET INCASE SHIT GETS FUCKED. Is this NOT important to you? Also, one third G would be fun to jump around in.

>>1987439
imagine the indoor basketball court in that outpost.

>>1987439
OK, i'll rephrase THE QUESTION

so you think making the less hospitable parts of earth habitable WITHOUT FUCKING UP REST OF PLANET is harder, per inhabitant, than terraforming mars?

>>1987445

it's true. be easier to build underwater cities than live on mars

At first they wouldnt be terraforming mars. They would live 'inside' domes or something like that. start setting up sources of energy, water, and whatever, slowly start to spread and grow more. Then once the colony is setup then you would start to mine it for resources. and once that happens the colony would start to increase a shitload you would get to thousands and thousands of people. Then MAYBE if we have the techonology and it wouldnt hurt resources much you would start terraforming mars. even though it would be incredibly easier to just make a large city seperate from the environment. Kinda like that guys hamster thing.

>>1987451
exactly, it's just a wanky far off dream

a totally herp derp solution to a pressing problem

>>1987456
o no u miss understood. We will go to mars, we probably wont terraform, but if we do it will be thousands of years away and the terraforming will take thousands of years aswell.


is it you whos saying the stuff about it being easier to just build an underwater city? because thats retarded. something being easier is not how we decide what to do. You thinking we shouldnt go to mars is like how people said we shouldnt go to the moon.

>>1987445
By amount of energy and planning involved, yes.
Mars does not have an ecosystem. Earth does. We can do whatever the fuck we want to Mars and it won't really affect us on Earth.
>>1987450
It would also be extremely expensive and then break down into chaos when there is a sale on Ayn Rand at Barnes and Nobles.
>>1987451
I would actually rather begin colonization first and terraforming later, but I fear that if colonization happens on a large enough scale that the governments of the future won't want to bother with terraforming because it involves too much restructuring and sacrificing the existing habitats.

>>1987464
>but if we do it will be thousands of years away and the terraforming will take thousands of years aswell.
http://www.futuretimeline.net/22ndcentury/2100-2149.htm#mars
http://www.futuretimeline.net/the-far-future.htm#mars-terraforming
http://www.futuretimeline.net/the-far-future.htm#mars-terraformed

>>1987467

>building and supporting heated cities in cold parts of earth more expensive than building and supporting cities on mars

too many drugs bro?

>>1987464
The plan would be overtaken by technology - we'll have von Neumann machines capable of devouring the planet by then.

>>1987482
No, just that in around 30 years when terraforming Mars becomes feasible (space elevator, robots etc etc) it could be done for no money whatsoever.

And besides, what is the point of building a large city on Ellesmere Island? Now, what is the point of building a city on Mars? Oh, I don't know, easier shipyards, a secondary planet for our species, and 1/3 G ball sports.

ONE THIRD G BALL SPORTS, IMAGINE HOW FUCKING AWESOME IT'LL BE WHEN WE CAN JUMP 5 METERS AND GET A SLAM DUNK

>>1987502

The question is, will the sports still be dominated by niggers?

>>1987502
i'm old, and basically they promised what you said 30 yrs ago. along with a whole load of other sci fi shit.

every now and again a smart engineer actually looks into feasibility, rather than day dreaming, and says, no, won't happen in my life time.

>>1987467

>>It would also be extremely expensive and then break down into chaos when there is a sale on Ayn Rand at Barnes and Nobles.

It's a lot cheaper than building on Mars, and you get most of the same benefits multiplied many times over.

I do think we need a self sufficient Martian outpost capable of expanding itself. But that's just it, we should spend only what is necessary to do what needs to be done. We're not going to build on Mars just for the sake of building on Mars. We'll build exactly and only what needs building, because beyond that point it's the colonists' responsibility to carry on.

Likewise with Chamberland's undersea civilian colony. He's getting no help from the state and at some point, when a modest colony exists, he's going to expect families to buy their own 'pods'.

>>1987506
Races will become obsolete with nanotechnology and limb upgrades/replacements.
>>1987510
How old are you? Also, Manhattan Beach Project.
>and basically they promised what you said 30 yrs ago. along with a whole load of other sci fi shit.
Y'know what happened to that? American politics happened to that. The one country that could financially afford such projects, and they squandered it. This is one of the large reasons why I despise the country and what it reportedly stands for.
>every now and again a smart engineer actually looks into feasibility, rather than day dreaming, and says, no, won't happen in my life time.
First off, is it possible you think he's smart because he has the qualifications a list of achievements, or because he is so pessimistic about the future?
And mind you, many of these predictions do not account for a radical societal change.

>>1987514
>We're not going to build on Mars just for the sake of building on Mars.
We're not going to build in the ocean just for the sake of building in the ocean.

>>1987517
so how would you quantify the chance of what you say will happen within 30 years? 1% 2 %?

anything above 5% and i'll happily lay a 30 year bet at those odds. hell it would cost you a hundred bucks to make $2000 off me

>>1987531
Which one?
Human level AI robots? 99%.
Radical life extension? 95%.
Plans for terraforming Mars? It ranges from 0% to 99%. Depends if I can get the country up by then.

>>1987525

>>We're not going to build in the ocean just for the sake of building in the ocean.

Of course not. We're going to build in the ocean because it's obscenely rich in biomass, air can be pulled out of the water all around you, it makes it possible to teleoperate wireless ROVs with direct line of sight, you can cultivate deep water species, Farm sea crops more effectively than the Dutch already do, Etc. etc.

There are good reasons to go to the sea floor, just like there are good reasons to go to Mars. But we'll only build what is called for, what is necessary to accomplish the larger objectives. We don't need a sprawling metropolis underwater. But it's pretty easy to justify a modular compound, as individual habitats can be separated and moved elsewhere to study geographically unique seafloor features, hydrothermal vents and their surrounding ecologies, methane 'lakes' in the midnight zone, that sort of thing.

Likewise there's plenty of reasons to build a martian colony of a sufficient size and complexity that it can self-sustain, and expand. Because that's it's purpose. You build to spec, is what I'm saying.

>>1987517
and "american politics" will happen again.

what you mean by "american politics" is what is necessary and sensible to do.

we could build a giant pyramid on the plains of patagonia if we wanted. but any cost benefit analysis would show it would be herp derp.

your attachment to mars is the same as a madman's attachment to a pyramid in patagonia

>>1987538
i'll take the 95% odds on radical life extension

all this is tinkering bullshit

majority of world live at or a little above subsistence level

solving that would be less work than going to mars, yet it isn't done.

/thread

>>1987543
Done deal, good sir.
Though there is the chance that money won't exist in it's current form then. And I'm not even talking about that post-scarcity bullshit.
>>1987550
Hold your horses, I'll take care of that

>>1987399
Just wait till Honda perfects Asimo.

That thing is the future of robotics.

tripfag = wrongmindsetforcriticalthinkingfag

a narcissist will never self crit his ideas properly

>>1987216
why do you need water? You have plenty of carbon you can use to reduce metals to make robots and solar panels. Though Mars does have an atmosphere and that makes things all the more difficult for doing fun high vacuum processes for making microchips. Mars also has a high gravity well. Mars isn't that fun, but heck might as well colonize it with robots anyway.

>>1987550
We will never be able to completely fix that unless we control breeding which is impossible.

Why should we help them anyway?

>>1987580
>We will never be able to completely fix that unless we control breeding which is impossible.
Are you aware why first-world countries have a low birthrate?
>Why should we help them anyway?
Pic related

>>1987556
No one person is going to think and make shit up that will benefit us all on a planetary scale.

It's all of us working together like a hyve mind.

My critical thinking, as opposed to your critical thinking. Are all essential for viewing things from different angles to help us anticipate the bigger picture. That's all.

>>1987550
screw that, let's just become a Kardashev level one first, then everything will work out from there.

>>1987592

I see from your trip that you fucking love robots. You may enjoy the new project I'm working on, a public access solar powered telepresence robot.

http://projectearthrover.blogspot.com/

>>1987596
That's. Awesome.

>>1987584
yea i think we should help them become self efficient for themselves and all. and then everyone will say once all countries are about equal that we should help the poor in our countries first. but there will always be a group of poor people.

unless you forced people to not have kids. but that is a disgusting idea.

>>1987609
First off, my goal is to make sure that 'poor people' have all the basic rights of life, so good food, clean water, a home and according to Finland, 100mbit internet.
Second, this coincides with the completion of the Manhattan Beach Project. Meaning, if you want young everlasting life, you're gonna have to get snipped.

>>1987596
doesn't look very waterproof bro. Will it live in a desert?

Also, why aren't you just using a standard LiPo cell battery instead of buying from some untrustworthy gentleman you found on the Internets. Batteries are pretty hard to fuck up.

Why are you using a toy built for use indoors instead of making your own platform. It's not that hard to make your own robotic platform. Just run one off on your local matter compiler.

Mifi? Just use a wireless datalink if it's not that far away(miles). They don't require subscriptions.

also, PICTURE BACKGROUND FOR WEBSITE=BAD FOR EYES. MY RETINAS ARE BURNING!

>>1987616
wtf why would they get snipped? thats fucking stupid.

>>1987616
Even though I do agree with that, not everyone would agree with you. It has to do with checks and balances just look at China, they tell people they have no more than one child. Also look at republicans, they somehow get the notion that each and every single individual has to fend for themselves, and if they cannot do that, then the deserve not have Health Care, not to have proper food, not to have proper shelter and they are therefore "getting what they deserve." Or at least what republicans think they deserve. In essence, the system working itself out. Like gay people not being able to reproduce.

Think about it this way, if everyone were allowed to reproduce without having to work for a living and just leech off the government for free, wouldn't that creates huge problem? Like for example, hundreds and thousands of people not doing anything to benefit society that just leaching off the system. Where would you draw the line for that?

>>1987625

>>doesn't look very waterproof bro. Will it live in a desert?

No, I'm using marine grade silicone sealant to waterproof it.

>>Also, why aren't you just using a standard LiPo cell battery instead of buying from some untrustworthy gentleman you found on the Internets. Batteries are pretty hard to fuck up.

The robot isn't set up to accept that voltage, nor is the dock equipped to charge a battery of that type.

>>Why are you using a toy built for use indoors instead of making your own platform. It's not that hard to make your own robotic platform. Just run one off on your local matter compiler.

It may look like a toy, but you have no experience with it. Having owned both the Spykee and the Rovio, the Spykee is a surprisingly robust, powerful and reliable telepresence platform.

>>Mifi? Just use a wireless datalink if it's not that far away(miles). They don't require subscriptions.

Needs to be something I can move to new locations when people get bored of exploring the spot it's at.

>>also, PICTURE BACKGROUND FOR WEBSITE=BAD FOR EYES. MY RETINAS ARE BURNING!

Get new eyes.

>>1987262
>The lower gravity shouldn't be an insurmountable problem, colonists will have more brittle bones, but this can partially be alleviated with exercise and proper diet. As for their eventual offspring, they will be taller and weaker (less muscle mass is needed for activity than on Earth. Conversely, Earth-born humans will have triple their strength on Mars) than Earth-born humans due to the lower gravity.

Wait, so if we colonise Mars.. THE COLONISTS WOULD START TO EVOLVE INTO GREYS?!

>>1987596
that is sick. you better make it nearly unflippable. the harder you say it is to flip the more fun it is to try, i wouldnt almost pay to use that just to try flip it.

>>1987672
would almost pay*

Mars needs a lot more mass. I propose we drop Mercury on it. After it cools, we drop a Jovian moon for water. Mercury has lots of iron--good resources. We should aim for the Mars north pole as the average elevation is higher there. The ice moon(s) we'll drop in the southern lowlands. Obviously a lot of mass will move around, but enough should remain where it is easily recoverable. The way the moons hit would impact Mar's rotational velocity. We might reduce the tilt to reduce the seasonal effects, and perhaps increase the rotational speed. I can't see moving Mars closer in, so we just have to adjust to the longer seasons.

bump

truth is, it would take way too much effort and money to terraform mars.

>>1992689
>truth is, it would take way too much effort and money to terraform mars.
Effort? No.
Money? Won't be a problem.

>>1987673
People born on mars will tend to be taller, not shorter.

You'd see shorter animals on planets with higher gravity.

>>1989544
You should do some more calculations there bro.

Mercury isn't even CLOSE to enough.

If you combine Mars and Venus together, you get just about Earth-normal mass.

People don't seem to realize just how tiny mars actually is.

>>1992697
Explain.

Why don't we just pollute the fuck out of it?