Terraforming

Yes billions instead of hundreds. I have to agree with Jesus on this Raven. Besides, mars is much larger then the moon and therefore has a bigger gravitation pull. Releasing greenhouse gasses on the surface would work, to some degree.

Your theory is to extreme and unfeasible.

Mars doesn't have an atmosphere, it's true. Also, my mother's a virgin, Lord of the Rings is based on a true story, and Mercury is actually twice the size of the Sun.

Mars doesn't have an atmosphere, it's true. Also, my mother's a virgin, Lord of the Rings is based on a true story, and Mercury is actually twice the size of the Sun.

You forgot the fact that gases aren't affected by gravity unless it is around a planet with an active core, the fact that the moon doesn't have gravity, and that tectonic activity causes fusion in a planet's core.

JH, you appear to be coming up with facts. I suggested a theory, I already know it's flawed.

I want you to prove that gases are not affected by gravity.

I also want you to prove that tectonic activity causes fusion, as far as I am aware it is because of the constant recycling of the matle that the tectonic plates move.

As for Delicious....billions intstead of hundreds? I'm slightly confused there.

Releasing green house gases on a planet will not work, we need something to hold it down, that is why nebulae exist. Becauses gases congrugate instead of hanging around a lifeless planet that has nothing to keep them there. We have an atmosphere because the earth is spinning, and the earth has a live core that causes gravity. Which is why the further we get away from the earth, the less oxygen there is. Otherwise, by your theory, that just gases meeting a planet, they'd stick to it, would actually have evidence of multiple layers of random gases, and this isn't so.

For instance 1st layer of oxygen, 2nd Layer of Nitrogen, 3rd layer of...in the order that they meet the planet.

I doubt, that releasing gases onto the planet will work. If you were talking about how many cubic metres of gases would need to be released you are talking trillions not just millions or billions and even that would barely surround the planet.

Which is why the only theory of terraforming a planet at the moment,  (that I know of) is the sci-fi glass domes.

Now, what I said about an implosion, is quite rightly, just fantasy and just a theory of creating heat intense enough to start the core up again. I don't know how to start fusion or how to generate that amount of heat, I was going a theory that an intense implosion would create a large enough supervacuum that the heat would be generated automatically. Thus I don't know much about bombs and how they work.

But overall, these gases...they just won't stick around, that's my point. Mars has no atmosphere, gravity that isn't enough to keep oxygen or Carbon dioxide on the planet at all. Unless, someone can provide proof i'm wrong? Anyone? Because that is a theory yet again, and I'd love to know if some scientist has gathered data that what I have gathered for myself from Stephen Hawkins theories.

Mars doesn't have an atmosphere, it's true. Also, my mother's a virgin, Lord of the Rings is based on a true story, and Mercury is actually twice the size of the Sun.

Thanks you.

"Terraforming Mars would entail two major interlaced changes: building the atmosphere and heating it. Since a thicker atmosphere of carbon dioxide and/or some other greenhouse gases would trap incoming solar radiation and the raised temperature would put the greenhouse gases into the atmosphere the two processes would augment one another"

"Greenhousing Mars via the manufacture of halocarbon gases on the planet's surface may well be the most practical option. Total surface power requirements to drive planetary warming using this method are calculated and found to be on the order of 1000 MWe, and the required times scale for climate and atmosphere modification is on the order of 50 years. "

"planet simulation allows addition of greenhouse gases like water vapor, ammonia, carbon dioxide and perfluorocarbons to Mars. In addition for different amounts of heat retention and reflection, the albedo and insolation can be adjusted. Since Mars has stored greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide) both at the polar caps and in the surface rocks and soil (regolith), those outgassing reservoirs can be freed up with warming and climate forcing. "

" Here are three terraforming methods that have been proposed:
~Large orbital mirrors that will reflect sunlight and heat the Mars surface.
~Greenhouse gas-producing factories to trap solar radiation.

~Smashing ammonia-heavy asteroids into the planet to raise the greenhouse gas level. "

"We know that Mars is the fourth planet in the solar system, Earth the third. Because of that, Mars is colder than Earth. It is colder and drier than any place on Earth. It also only has a very thin, poisonous for humans atmosphere. Above that, the surface has some peroxides that would destroy any known living tissue. "

" The idea in terraforming Mars is the following:   
Melting the southern polar icecap to release large quantities of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, which, because of the greenhouse effect of this gas, will heat up the planet, maybe enough to release more carbon dioxide from the regolith and maybe even melting the northern polar icecap (Underground waterdepots would take a very long time to evaporate to get onto the surface of Mars) without extra heating. 
When the step of enriching the atmosphere with carbon dioxide (and nitrogen) and the surface with water is achieved, the second step starts: Enriching the atmosphere in oxygen (and nitrogen). 
This is simply done by releasing plants that can survive on Mars' still rude climate. Some genetical engineering might be necessary to achieve this step.  "



Heard enough? Cause I can go all night.

Nah keep going 

I'm learning every minute. So where did you find all this information? But I do have to admit, that you are right in this case. Maybe this should have been done earlier?

I hadn't found the data that Mars had a thin atmosphere...that's why I want to know where you found it.

Nah keep going 

I'm learning every minute. So where did you find all this information? But I do have to admit, that you are right in this case. Maybe this should have been done earlier?

I hadn't found the data that Mars had a thin atmosphere...that's why I want to know where you found it.

It's not were I got the information from that matters. What matters is that I'm always right.

But I think you are a big boy to admit your mistakes so gracefully. *Gives Cookie*

*takes cookie*...hmm...*sneaks another*

Yeah, me is a big boy! (who are we kiddin?)

No you're not always right, but those theories are grounded, I've checked around and most of them are backed up by reputable scientists.

Deliciously_Saucy

Points are pretty much all correct give or take... And he gave the simplest of terms... But the time scale of 50 years is just for the adjustment of the atmospher (I would say much longer as the change needs to be a gradual build up), we have to also take into account making a ship that can transport many people, the housing of those people, the work and industry build up... Lots of other factors... Getting food up there, shipments, import & export... LOADS... I doubt we will see people living on Mars in our life times.

Here's some links on Terraforming:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming
http://science.howstuffworks.com/terraforming.htm

we're not yet sure how long we'll be living soon...have a look at the aging thread.

JH, you appear to be coming up with facts. I suggested a theory, I already know it's flawed.

I was just saying what other people in this thread already have.

I want you to prove that gases are not affected by gravity.

It has been proven, they released Gases on the moon...they dispersed and headed off to the nearest black hole...or so we think, the point is, they didn't stick around. There is no gravitational field to keep them there and thus  float off where ever they want to. Water, sticks together in space (as an example of what a gas does) but it will jut by a tiny momentum drift off forever never reaching it's target. That's what I mean.

Gases cannot stick to a planet unless there is a gravitational field keeping them there. The gases only stay on earth because of the gravity and the spin (or so says Stephen Hawkins)

I was a bit hasty with this one. What you sseemed to be saying is that the moon does not have gravity and that atmospheres remain around a planet isn't just because there is gravity, but because it spins. My mistake.

I also want you to prove that tectonic activity causes fusion, as far as I am aware it is because of the constant recycling of the matle that the tectonic plates move.

I theorized and implosion, because an explosion would completely wipe out the planet of the magnitude I was talking about. An implosion would be something that created an astronomical amount of heat in a contained area this will theoretically heat up the core and thus get the tectonic plates of Mars moving again. This would create fusion inside the planet, where energy is constantly being recycled.

What you said.

Releasing green house gases on a planet will not work, we need something to hold it down, that is why nebulae exist. Becauses gases congrugate instead of hanging around a lifeless planet that has nothing to keep them there. We have an atmosphere because the earth is spinning, and the earth has a live core that causes gravity. Which is why the further we get away from the earth, the less oxygen there is. Otherwise, by your theory, that just gases meeting a planet, they'd stick to it, would actually have evidence of multiple layers of random gases, and this isn't so.

The Earth's gravity doesn't exist because we have an active core, and we don't have an atmosphere because the Earth is spinning. Also, can you tell me the names of all the planets and what order they are in?

Now, what I said about an implosion, is quite rightly, just fantasy and just a theory of creating heat intense enough to start the core up again. I don't know how to start fusion or how to generate that amount of heat, I was going a theory that an intense implosion would create a large enough supervacuum that the heat would be generated automatically. Thus I don't know much about bombs and how they work.

What implosion? What causes it? You can't just say "implosion" like it explains everything.

But overall, these gases...they just won't stick around, that's my point. Mars has no atmosphere, gravity that isn't enough to keep oxygen or Carbon dioxide on the planet at all. Unless, someone can provide proof i'm wrong? Anyone? Because that is a theory yet again, and I'd love to know if some scientist has gathered data that what I have gathered for myself from Stephen Hawkins theories.

Mars has an atmosphere. I didn't know Stephen Hawking spelled his name "Hawkins".

a ship that can transport many people

Never gonna happen. Colonization will involve a lot of fertile women and test tube babies.

we're not yet sure how long we'll be living soon...have a look at the aging thread.

Ha... Very True...LOL

I heard about a guy who had am illness that made him age faster, and alledgly doctors could have slowed the effects and added to his life span, but the law stopped them from helping as its against ethics.

I hope we do get to expand lives of people.  I think say if you work hard, say every 10 years of continued employeement I think an expansion of life of say 5 years should be given.

___Any way back to Topic___

The how stuff Works link is pretty cool that I posted it shows a mock up of what a small Mars set up could be like and goes into a bit of detail on Mars from an Astronaugts point of view.

Finally a better post. Much better.

Order of planets

My Very Easy Method Just Speeds Up Naming (and the last one is no longer a planet)

Mecury, Venus, Eart, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune.

I have said something before...i.e A big bomb, i'm not even sure how to create one.

Stephen Hawkings, my mistake.

A ship that can transport many people...people didn't think planes could carry more than one person...guess what....

Jesus: Your just recycling some points I've already made... But hey, at least you made some of them funny.

A big bomb, i'm not even sure how to create one.

That would create an Implosion?

Mecury, Venus, Eart, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune.

This isn't Sailor Moon and he was making a joke.

Lmao...i failed to pick up on that...

and yes...a big bomb that would create an implosion. Geez I have no idea. *shrug*

Finally a better post. Much better.

I don't post to please you.

My Very Easy Method Just Speeds Up Naming (and the last one is no longer a planet)

There's a mnemonic to remember the order of the planets? I've known them by heart since I was six.

Eart

I know it's a typo, but it's still funny as fuck.

I have said something before...i.e A big bomb, i'm not even sure how to create one.

Well if you don't know what sort of bomb it is or what effect it would have then it is a very bad idea to figure it into any of your plans.

Stephen Hawkings, my mistake.

A ship that can transport many people...people didn't think planes could carry more than one person...guess what....

Perhaps sometime in the future we might have gigantic ships capable of carrying thousands of people (Guild Heighliners are the sort of thing I have in mind) but for the next few hundred years you better not expect anything more than a handful of people on a ship at a time.

Well yeah, but Pluto was declassified...no longer a planet...

and yeah, I know it'll take a while, but who knows we've developed from nothing to coal in what 10 years

Well yeah, but Pluto was declassified...no longer a planet...

Pluto? What?

and yeah, I know it'll take a while, but who knows we've developed from nothing to coal in what 10 years

More like two hundred thousand.

Well yeah, but Pluto was declassified...no longer a planet...

Pluto? What?

Yeh I wouldn't be surprised. I haven't heard that as fact, but it never was a planet in my opinion.

A ship that can transport many people...people didn't think planes could carry more than one person...guess what....

Space travel has been going on for years, and the best they have is a 3 manned ship.

But they are working on a Solar plane...

A Mock up picture, there are a few of these going about at the mo


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaceplane

Its still a fair way off... But one day we may all be able to traverse space as easy as we can the skies... all I am saying its not in our life time.

A ship that can transport many people...people didn't think planes could carry more than one person...guess what....

Space travel has been going on for years, and the best they have is a 3 manned ship.

But they are working on a Solar plane...

A Mock up picture, there are a few of these going about at the mo


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaceplane

Its still a fair way off... But one day we may all be able to traverse space as easy as we can the skies... all I am saying its not in our life time.

Oh oh oh! I sore a documentary that had that plane in it! VERY kool!

They said the biggest problem would be a HUGE amount of travel sickness that would arise from travel in it though... I say that the government has given up on space travel far to much, I say they've fucked up so bad that it has ( and had ) made it possible for privet companies to pic up the slack. Forget the name, but some guy ( I think he's working with Virgin on it as well ) has already built a semi-working proto type of a small plane to send the common man into space. Holiday related

Yeah... its getting there...

But now with all this talk of Pollution and emissions and so on... People are going nuts over people having more than one Holiday by plane a year.

I guess once the Space plane is built may be it will run on a new fuel... At least I hope it will.

I doubt the Space plane will get commisioned in todays world even if it would work, one reason why not, is we don't need it yet.

I still think adapting parts of our own planet should be looked at... imagine a Undewater world in a dome or some thing...



More possible than Mars being made livable ?

Would and underwater city feel the effects of Global change... I dunno...

I still think adapting parts of our own planet should be looked at... imagine a Undewater world in a dome or some thing...



More possible than Mars being made livable ?

Would and underwater city feel the effects of Global change... I dunno...

LOL Sealab 2021. *BANG*!!

I luuuuuuvvv the sea, perhaps a topic should be made....

Those Monster Giant Squids turn me on...

It is an interesting point though, I must say it never occurred to me thinking about the mass overpopulation problem that the majority of earth is water... I say it could be done. Obviously not now, but hey...

rambling about Mars' atmosphere

I said it had an atmosphere, never said it was the best of them all.

I said it had an atmosphere, never said it was the best of them all.

Well done...



I know Building under the sea or in the mountains or any place else on Earth wont save the Human race should the Earth be destroyed...

So I guess getting Human life out in the Cosmos has to still be researched and one day achived... But talking about this now when its distant future is futile.