GUTH Venus is way too hot for even Bad Astronomy

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
om

A few more of my usual topic corrections and improvements (the best I
can do considering all the status quo flak that's tossed my way).

Besides the well insulated and CO2--CO/O2 thermal heat exchanged
habitat potential that's technically doable within the realm of what's
known to work, the Venusian Composite Rigid Airship is what otherwise
makes Venus truly accessible. Having a to/from spaceplane is a given,
as a Fat Waverider or fancy Skylon whatever, it technically doable
within the known space travel, reentry and launch or exit technologies
that simply do not need to be invented out of thin air, just R&D
assembled and fine tuned to the point of their being reliably safe to
utilize multiple shuttle like times.

It's certainly easy to naysay Venus, but it's easier yet to simply
pillage, plunder and rape mother Venus for all she's worth, and than
some. After all, we've more than proven we can do it to Earth, so why
stop now when we're on such a roll.

The planetology of Venus is what's actually that of a very
intellectually cool and extra special planet, especially upon
considering there's so much spare and fully renewable energy to burn
(sort of speak). As such, why the hell bother to terraform a damn thing
when it's more than good enough to go as is?

Venus has only been promoted as being too hot and nasty for the likes of
those "Bad Astronomy" types, and of most others afraid of their own
shadow, plus for otherwise having rubbed our hocus-pocus NASA the wrong
way because, they're all clearly one in the same mindset collective,
meaning they is the truly bad guys, the MIB kind of cloak and dagger
MI6/NSA spooks and moles as representing the status quo borg like Skull
and Bones collective that's clearly the top naysay king of this world,
except without an actual soul nor so much as a stitch of pesky remorse.
They used to get away with burning us witches and our books at the
stake, though for our kid's sake is why prime-time and mainstream media
has to somewhat frown on that level of action (similar to their avoiding
being associated with those having exterminated Cathars or the likes of
pushing nuns off a bridge which doesn't exactly promote good PR), so
instead they proceed to topic/author stalk, bash and as much as possible
take to excluding evidence and/or simply banishing whatever rocks their
good but seriously rotting ship of their's, the USS LOLLIPOP that's
flying that home port flag of "up your's" USA.

I'll say it again Sam; Why bother with sustaining the ongoing ruse, or
otherwise with the daunting and nearly insurmountable task of having to
terraform Venus, when it's simply more than good enough as is?

What's really important of us to realize, is to appreciate that we have
a serious Venusian composite rigid airship gap: so what's the big
insurmountable deal with that?

Why the hell not invest the necessary R&D into creating a viable
composite rigid airship (hybrid Skylon or fat waverider spaceplane), on
behalf of our doing Venus in grand style?

It's not even all that hocus-pocus or having to involve the pesky likes
of all those NASA/Apollo smoke and mirrors, instead it's simply doable
within the regular laws of physics as is. The actual rigid airship as a
Venusian atmospheric cruising probe that'll function rather nicely below
their nighttime season of clouds needn't be manned, and therefore
needn't be all that large.

Unlike most other planets, or even moons that we know of, Venus is just
getting itself started at kicking it's own DNA butt, and otherwise Mars
DNA has long been kicked, nicely cosmic zapped and then rather nicely
freeze dried to death.

The composite rigid airship as efficiently operating within the highly
buoyant Venusian environment (say cruising along at 25 km by season of
nighttime and 35 km by season of daytime) can at least accommodate our
form of intelligent other life in more viable ways than it's being given
credit for. There has even been good enough SAR obtained pictures of
what's been accomplished by others. Yet lo and behold, Venus remains as
by far the most nearby and absolute most accessible taboo/nondisclosure
other orb in our solar system, that's none the less easier and much
safer than doing our moon.

Unlike our nearly frozen solid to the very core of that silly old Mars,
that's also representing an environment that's worthy of getting
yourself cosmic TBI and otherwise rather easily pulverised to death
while on that nearly naked surface, whereas on the relatively newish and
evolving planetology surface of Venus there's hardly any cosmic or nasty
forms of solar energy that's DNA lethal getting through all of that
thick soup of atmosphere, nor is there hardly any need of your having to
dig in in order to find more than your fair share of geothermal or
terrific gas vent issues that can be put directly to the task of
extracting renewable energy on the spot.

The vertical atmospheric thick soup of such nifty pressure and thermal
differential factors alone are clearly by themselves more than
sufficient means to sustain most any mere halfwit intelligent form of
life. That is unless you are one of these warm and fuzzy naysay Usenet
village idiots, in which case absolutely nothing is possible in the
past, present or future, so why bother.

The ongoing devoid or rather ongoing topic/author banishment of such
viable energy related ideas or even honest swags of any other viable
considerations from this anti-think-tank of our status quo or bust
naysay Usenet land, that's having been really good at their typically
sucking and blowing worth of infomercial crapolla spewing on behalf of
all things government and big-energy, is simply further proof-positive
that such renewable energy while on then Venusian deck has been doable.

Venus is in fact a physically hot place, though actually it's not all
that nasty of an environment. But so what if it's hot, as long as
you've got such access to and having the sufficient smarts on behalf of
utilizing the vast amounts of renewable energy that's already there to
behold?

Just because a given planet or moon is a little too hot, too cold or
even too wet for our naked bodies or physiological grasp, doesn't in of
itself mean that it's 100+% taboo. Escaping the lethal forms of cosmic
and solar radiation seems by far more of a life essential important
issue, and secondly avoiding whatever's physically incoming seems like
yet another win-win for the old gipper, especially if it's having to do
with avoiding getting seriously smacked in the butt by way of something
that has your name on it.

Venus simply couldn't possibly be any more newish, alive and kicking on
the various doors of accommodating other life, especially on behalf of
rather easily accommodating intelligent other life that's merely
visiting, possibly even of a few locally evolved species isn't outside
of this toasty Venusian box. Although, I suppose if there's lots of
cosmic radiated and otherwise meteorite pulverised dry-ice, plus
whatever remains of that sub-frozen regular old Mars ice that's perhaps
near solid to the very icy dead (older than Earth) core of Mars is still
somehow life worthy, then so be it.

These pro-Mars folks should simply impress us, as in knocking our socks
off, if they can. I'm absolutely certain that as of millions of years
ago Mars could have had a touch of life to spare, and back a good
billion some odd years even better odds yet for having sustained sizable
(larger than rad-hard microbe) forms of such other local life
(intelligent being yet to be proven unless merely visiting).

On the other very real and honest hands of utilizing those regular laws
of physics, as such there is absolutely nothing that's so downright
terribly insurmountable about Venus. Thinking otherwise is only the
proof-positive as to how completely snookered and dumbfounded past that
pathetic mindset point of no return you have become.

BTW; if the absolutely bleak realm of whatever that Mars of today has
to offer in the way of sharing any remainders of Martian life there is
to behold, then upon our own pesky moon that's still more than a touch
salty is what has to be absolutely loaded to the gills, with all of it's
local and cosmic DNA morgue worth of nifty spores, and you name it.

BTW No.2; ESA's already doing Venus, Russia is going back there next:
where's ours?

-

"habshi" hi@anony wrote in message

How would you transport the energy from Venus to Earth .
First of all, screw Earth. I say; Whatever happens in Venus stays in
Venus.

However, on behalf of good PR or rather tossing the Earth dog a bone,
utilizing a fairly massive rigid airship as our floating tarmac or
rather elevated launching pad on behalf of accommodating our
interplanetary Skylon or whatever spaceplane, that's of an airship
w/piggyback spaceplane combo that's capable of cruising at good enough
velocity above the 100 km altitude mark, is what seems rather doable.
As such, I suppose extracting a few hundred tonnes of 80+% uranium
yellowcake as valuable radioactive elements, of going after mostly U238
could offer an impressive payback. Venus should have more than it's
fair share of yellowcake, and no GreenPeace or ELF protesters in sight.

What's 100 tonnes of the highest purity yellowcake worth these days?

I heard $100/yellowcake pound the other day. That's merely
$220,462/tonne

However, I suppose we could just transport the fully processeed
U238/U239, or as ready to go reactor fuels of 96% U238, and 4% U235 at
roughly $1,500/kg as of today, perhaps worth $3,000/kg in the near
future.

Old pricing data: http://www.uic.com.au/nfc.htm
"Total cost is thus about US$ 1393 for 1 kg enriched fuel, plus about
$240 for actual fuel fabrication. This will yield about 3900 GJ thermal
energy at modern burn-up rates, or about 360,000 kWh of electricity (at
33% thermal efficiency), and does the same job as about 160 tonnes of
steaming coal for a total cost of 0.45 cents/kWh (US$) - a bit more at
lower burn-up."

BTW; our hocus-pocus government is back on the warpath for uncovering
local yellowcake, this time using the ruse of radon(Rn222) gas exposure
as their sneaky means by which they pretend to be giving a tinkers damn
about us village idiots, when in fact they simply want to know exactly
how much yellowcake your home is sitting on, or possibly how badly
contaminated they've made that environment. It's not that we don't have
yellowcake potential, it's just spread out and of relatively low purity
and thus lower energy value (like much of our coal isn't hardly worth
burning for all the trouble and soot plus released toxins and even
radiation that gets deployed via each tonne of spent coal that gets into
our above surface environment that's in the process of failing us in
more ways than mere polution).

In fact, the interplanetary "tomcat" Fat Waverider or fancy Skylon like
spaceplane itself could become fully nuclear powered via those same
radioactive elements of U238/U235, as exclusively obtained from Venus.
Therefore those nifty payloads of such fuel returned to Earth is our's
to keep, including the spent fuel remainders which unavoidably comes
along with the package deal from hell. Too bad we're still not smart
enough to figure out He3/fusion.

There's certainly no insurmountable complications in getting such
payload tonnage of whatever's extracted, away from Venus. Every 19
months Venus gets to within nearly 100 fold the distance of our moon
(that's close enough to spit at one another), so the travel time isn't
even a big factor.

All the necessary rocket fuel(s) of CO/O2 plus whatever else can be
locally processed into even better reactive thrust energy is also not
the least bit of any big deal, since all the necessary energy for
processing whatever into damn near anything is already there to behold.
In a few other not so silly words, you couldn't hardly ask for a better
home away from home planet than Venus.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Bookman" wrote in message


Hi, Brad! Gonna figure out the inverse square law someday?

Don't have to because you're so smart and all.

BTW; Are you still sleeping with Art Deco?
-
Brad Guth



--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:2f4b8f6952c411cf3306a265029cd782.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

Earth is getting rid of roughly 25+ millijoules/m2, with a surface area
of 5.112e14 m2, in that supposedly this represents a
minimum/conservative core loss of 13e12 joules. I tend to believe it's
worth at least for times that amount, but that's just my village idiot
swag of deductive thinking a little outside the box, as what the hell
would we ever do with 52 terajoules worth of essentially renewable and
clean energy.

Venus at 2625 ~ 2650 j/m2 of average solar influx
Surface area: 4.6e14 m2
Mass: 4.87x1024 kg
Density: 5.24 g/cm3
Local gravity: 8.87 m/s2
Escape velocity: 10.3 km/s
Albedo: 0.75 ~ 0.85

Just for another lose cannon worthy example; At an average surface
geothermal radiant heat loss of 10 j/m2 = 4.6e15 joules of available
core energy would have to exist. By any planetology standards, that's
absolutely impressive at even 10% that amount.

Fortunately, according to the existing and ongoing research of others,
the Venusian influx/radiative energy balance has been running at a loss,
which I believe has been a good thing to know and appreciate as to why
Venus is gradually getting itself cooler by each extremely long
daytime/nighttime season.

Energy flux absorbed by the Earth = 1370 x (1-0.3) / 4 = 239.7 W/m2
Energy flux absorbed by the Venus = 2650 x (1-0.8) / 4 = 132.5 W/m2

(a nifty looking document, but slower than hell if not impossible to
load)
http://planetologia.elte.hu/atlasz/6...vironments.pdf

A whole lot better though incomplete info, and what there is to behold
is somewhat NASA and/or Old Testament skewed in order to suit their
'Earth only' mindset as to intelligent life.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Venera13Surface.jpg

http://www.atmos.washington.edu/2002...reenhouse.html
"Even though Venus receives more solar energy than the Earth is, its
effective temperature is colder. This is due to the high albedo on
Venus (0.8): 80% of solar radiation is reflected to space and only 20%
is absorbed by the surface."

Actually it's getting primarily absorbed and rather nicely transferred
about by that extremely thick atmosphere of mostly dry CO2 and a few
hundred spare teratonnes worth of acidic clouds, and otherwise the solar
influx is extensively blocked by the robust layer of S8, and damn little
(perhaps 0.015% of 2650 j/m2) ever directly reaches the surface by means
much other than atmospheric conductive/convection.

In other words, Venus on its far outside is cooler than Earth's thin
atmospheric realm (especially by way of their extended season of
nighttime), though upon average roughly 132 j/m2 of solar influx gets
absorbed by the entire global environment of Venus (mostly accommodated
within its robust atmosphere that otherwise reflects ~80%. It's the
killer geothermal surface that we have to worry about if we're ever
planing to walk upon that toasty orb, especially in many locations of
active lava, mud/plastic flows of raw minerals or worse yet if near any
of those pesky geothermal forced S8/CO2 gas vents that should by rights
be literally hotter than hell.

Of course, so much unlike our wet environment with its relatively clear
and thus solar transparent atmospheric realm of Earth, whereas so much
of the solar IR influx directly reaches our surface, as opposed to the
Venus surface environment being rather well shielded by the fully
clouded atmosphere that also includes a substantial reflective internal
boundary layer of thermal and IR spectrum isolating S8, whereas the
actual solar influx reaching the surface via direct sunlight is thereby
extensively IR filtered/moderated long before reaching the surface, and
otherwise the visual spectrum isn't hardly worth 39 j/m2 at high noon
(the average at something less) while obviously on the sunny side, and
to be certain that hardly anything of that's going to be of IR.

This leaves us with all of those Venusian boat loads of geothermal
energy that's primarily responsible for the vast bulk of why it's so
freaking toasty on that newish planetology active deck. Of course in
physics that's a darn good thing because, via those regular laws of
physics is where all sorts of nifty alternatives for extracting such
renewable energy while you're sequestered upon Venus becomes doable,
making it entirely possible to sustain as much ice cold beer and even a
few indoor ice skating rinks if you'd like.

Too bad this anti-think-tank of our status quo Usenet from the one and
only actual hell on Earth that for some pathetic reason(s) can't manage
to pull its infomercial spewing butt-cheek brains out of the nearest
space-toilet, especially if it's having anything to do with Venus, much
less with our very own physically dark orbiting mascon and otherwise GW
worthy moon.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG