Terraforming Mars

In article ,
Hop David wrote:
In fact, to my mind the biggest weakness of terraforming is simply that it
takes too long... Never mind the
details of holding together the project's own organization; more important
is whether it will still have *customers* at the end.

Endeavors requiring efforts longer than an election term are vulnerable.

That comes under the "holding together the project's own organization"
heading, to my mind. Yes, it's significant, but there are conceivable
solutions. The problem of whether there will still be customers at the
end of it all is more fundamental.
--
MOST launched 30 June; first light, 29 July; 5arcsec | Henry Spencer
pointing, 10 Sept; first science, early Oct; all well. |

I do not know does this have any sense. It is impossible by all our common
sense.

But let's try for a change something impossible, since teraforming is
getting to be so interesting and it does not look impssible.

Why not we suppose that we can replace Mars with Europa and Europa with
Mars.

I do not know how to do it, nor I dohave any idea how to do it, but the
energy balances would more or less zero. And the energy is all that matters
That kind of computer simulation would be done easily, and who knew maybe
some day that would be easier then teraforming a Mars.

Adriatic

"Roger Stokes" wrote in message
...
If Mars were provided with a breathable atmosphere by some means in the
future, how long would it take to be lost to space?

"Adriatic" wrote in message
...


I do not know does this have any sense. It is impossible by all our common
sense.

But let's try for a change something impossible, since teraforming is
getting to be so interesting and it does not look impssible.

Why not we suppose that we can replace Mars with Europa and Europa with
Mars.

I do not know how to do it, nor I dohave any idea how to do it, but the
energy balances would more or less zero.

What energy balances would be more or less zero?


And the energy is all that matters
That kind of computer simulation would be done easily, and who knew maybe
some day that would be easier then teraforming a Mars.

Adriatic

"Roger Stokes" wrote in message
...
If Mars were provided with a breathable atmosphere by some means in the
future, how long would it take to be lost to space?

"Adriatic" wrote in message
...

Why not we suppose that we can replace Mars with Europa and Europa with
Mars.

The mass of Mars is about 6e23 Kg
the deltaV (mars-jupiter) is about 10 km/sec

Thus the energy needed to move Mars to Jupiter is around 3e31 joules. If
this is done over 100 years the average power required is around 2e22 watts.
If the current energy generation capability of the Earth is 1e13 watts (this
is the bit I'm not sure of), and economic and power growth is constant and
eternal at 4% per year (the philosophy of capitalism and the cancer cell),
then by the year 2667 the human race may be willing to spend 1% of it's
energy resources moving planets.

Comment?

JRS: In article , seen in
news:sci.space.science, Roger Stokes posted at
Sat, 22 Nov 2003 06:26:54 :-

The mass of Mars is about 6e23 Kg
the deltaV (mars-jupiter) is about 10 km/sec

Thus the energy needed to move Mars to Jupiter is around 3e31 joules. If
this is done over 100 years the average power required is around 2e22 watts.
If the current energy generation capability of the Earth is 1e13 watts (this
is the bit I'm not sure of), and economic and power growth is constant and
eternal at 4% per year (the philosophy of capitalism and the cancer cell),
then by the year 2667 the human race may be willing to spend 1% of it's
energy resources moving planets.


The Earth maintains ~300K receiving 2e17 W from the Sun. If the earth
generates and uses 100 * 2e22 W locally, that's 1E7 times as much,
raising the Earth to ~17000K on a T^4 basis.

The Earth should use Solar power, not compete with it.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. / ©
Web URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Correct = 4-line sig. separator as above, a line precisely "-- " (SoRFC1036)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with "" or " " (SoRFC1036)

"Dr John Stockton" wrote in message
...

The Earth maintains ~300K receiving 2e17 W from the Sun. If the earth
generates and uses 100 * 2e22 W locally, that's 1E7 times as much,
raising the Earth to ~17000K on a T^4 basis.

The Earth should use Solar power, not compete with it.

Presumably by the year 2667 planets will be zoned residential only - the
heavy duty stuff will occur out where no-one will be inconvenienced.

BTW I recall a suggestion for moving planets (by a Brit if I remember
correctly) by equipping asteroids with fusion moters and making multiple
gravitational slingshots - with the difference that the planet would slowly
gain energy from the slingshots.

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, Dr John Stockton wrote:
|The Earth maintains ~300K receiving 2e17 W from the Sun. If the earth
|generates and uses 100 * 2e22 W locally, that's 1E7 times as much,
|raising the Earth to ~17000K on a T^4 basis.
|
|The Earth should use Solar power, not compete with it.

Hm. But don't solar panels have a way of burning out with time?

What is needed, is a furnace that mass-produces solar cells, and
launches them into orbit around Mars. At the least, refineries for
that very purpose have to be built on the Moon before we try to do
that thing on Mars.

If we measure success by counting out kilotons of aluminum forged from
the surface of the Moon, we surely have a very long way to go at this
point, let alone speculate about the eventual terraforming of Mars.