|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Good points Brad. I found your report really interesting. There are some
really interesting points throughout.. If you could get it enough micro-biology there after blowing it up would this lead to sustaining the atmosphere like it does here or earth.? As I see it earth keeps its microscopic parts of H2O because of our atmosphere. Admitted it would take hundreds of years. But life itself keep the H20 on our plantet like it does. Assuming there is water underground as there claims to be. The other idea I had is could be smash that asteroid into it. Wasnt there one due to fly our way in a few years? H20 problem solved maybe?? Mick "MIKE" wrote in message ... Isn't Titan answered the question that it is possible to make a moon have an atmosphere. Do you think we could ever make the moon have an atmosphere once colonised there.?? Could it be done without blowing it up? Mick |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
The 'half life' of a lunar atmosphere
would be about 4000 years, vondrak has calculated. Plenty of time to slowly replenish it, as jorge already suggested. As I understand it, Mars lost its atmosphere because the core solidified, so that now its magnetic field is weak, and the solar wind can knock the atmosphere off of the planet. Another option to restore the atmosphere on Mars would be to simply melt the core. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Havent you watched to much TV. That is science fictions for sure.
That aint never gonna happen. "Revision" wrote in message ... The 'half life' of a lunar atmosphere would be about 4000 years, vondrak has calculated. Plenty of time to slowly replenish it, as jorge already suggested. As I understand it, Mars lost its atmosphere because the core solidified, so that now its magnetic field is weak, and the solar wind can knock the atmosphere off of the planet. Another option to restore the atmosphere on Mars would be to simply melt the core. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Mike,
Terraforming the moon might require at most vaporising all of 0.00001% of the moon. Now, if I can only get the math sufficiently correct; moon mass = 7.35e22 kg Thus 0.00001% = 73.5e15 kg or 73.5e12 tonnes Vaporising 73.5 teratonnes, at 50% of that remaining around for becoming atmosphere is 36.75 teratonnes. (eventually I'd tend to believe 75% of the basalt vapor would remain as lunar atmosphere) 36.75e12 / 38 m2e12 = 0.9671 tonnes/m2 Add the contributions of artificial CO2/Rn as impactors, plus whatever other junk such as spent nuclear fuel rods, and lo and behold we've got at least a good 0.1 bar worth of atmosphere to work with. Considering the relatively slight gravity of 1.623 m/s/s, and the fact that the day/night environment of the moon would have become considerably moderated, chances are better than good that the final balance could turn out as great as 0.17 bar, that's only becoming greater as you take yourself underground (0.17 bar wouldn't be sufficient for radiation shielding nor any assurances from being summarily pulverised by whatever the moon is running itself into at 30+km/s. Unfortunately, unless we imported a great deal of CO2/Rn, even the 0.17 Bar wouldn't likely be sufficient for the likes of raw water to coexist for long. Keeping H2O in the formula of H2O2 begs to suggest an alternative, as the H2O can be extracted on demand, or the H2O2 utilized as is along with a slight amount of C12H26(kerosene) as fuel and oxidiser for operating all of the necessary IRRCEs. If there's water underground, it's likely deeper than several kilometers, as basalt is not an absolute solid, and there's supposedly that 830°C lunar core just doing all that it can as to escape into the near vacuum of space, taking along whatever water in the process, plus half the time the sun contributing nearly 1.4 kw/m2 that's roasting the relatively dark basalt and heavily meteorite strewn surface to a fairlywell. Since some of the craters are indicating 25+km deep, I'd have to give the best chance for whatever remaining lunar water as residing within captive geode pockets, and the deeper the better for those to have survived the test of time. As to redirecting fairly large asteroids into the moon, I'm thinking that a great many smaller impacts would offer a safer bet. Where do you think some of the nastiest of meteor impacts upon Earth originated from? Being that we seem to have no viable defence against keeping large aircraft from smashing into tall buildings, what chance would we have avoiding whatever secondary shards via significant moon impact? Although I don't have the expertise in this, I'd tend to think that a 10t impactor arriving at 10+km/s, or 1.0t at 30+km/s is just about all that would keep to itself, that is without sharing something of a nasty shard off the moon that'll have to arrive upon Earth. Regards, Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm "MIKE" wrote in message Good points Brad. I found your report really interesting. There are some really interesting points throughout.. If you could get it enough micro-biology there after blowing it up would this lead to sustaining the atmosphere like it does here or earth.? As I see it earth keeps its microscopic parts of H2O because of our atmosphere. Admitted it would take hundreds of years. But life itself keep the H20 on our plantet like it does. Assuming there is water underground as there claims to be. The other idea I had is could be smash that asteroid into it. Wasnt there one due to fly our way in a few years? H20 problem solved maybe?? Mick "MIKE" wrote in message ... Isn't Titan answered the question that it is possible to make a moon have an atmosphere. Do you think we could ever make the moon have an atmosphere once colonised there.?? Could it be done without blowing it up? Mick -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"Revision" wrote in message
The 'half life' of a lunar atmosphere would be about 4000 years, vondrak has calculated. Plenty of time to slowly replenish it, as jorge already suggested. As I understand it, Mars lost its atmosphere because the core solidified, so that now its magnetic field is weak, and the solar wind can knock the atmosphere off of the planet. Another option to restore the atmosphere on Mars would be to simply melt the core. It would be much so easier and energy efficient to terraform our moon, thus far more valuable by having as much as 0.17 bar available for getting robotics onto and even flying about the moon via aerodynamics. Once the LSE-CM/ISS is up and running, then we could start efficiently tossing all sorts of moon stuff at Mars, thus pulverising that planet in to submission of regaining a bit more atmosphere as based primarily upon the ratio of vaporised Mars basalt and other soil elements into becoming the sort of atmospheric elements that might stick around long enough to make a difference. That ratio could be 100,000:1 Meaning that for every initial tonne that's artificially directed at impacting Mars, this kinetic energy release should generate 100,000 tonnes of atmosphere. Of course as the atmosphere builds, the effective ratio reduces due to the imposed atmospheric drag. Depending on the roundabout trajectory, and of the final impact velocity, at least the initial launch energy away from the LSE-CM/ISS isn't going to bankrupt nor pollute mother Earth. In spite of all the orchestrated flak, I have managed to create a few other related topics, several of which are not specifically about our moon, though in more than a few ways offering everything about future space exploration and just plain old space travel itself that's at least indirectly related to utilizing our moon as a rather necessary gravitational booster shot, of such missions passing as close to the moon as possible hasn't even been such a new idea, it just so happens to coincide with the even better logic and values of what the LSE-CM/ISS is good for. "Terraforming the moon, before doing Mars or Venus" "The Moon, LSE-CM/ISS, Venus and beyond, with He3 to burn" "Lunar/Moon Space Elevator, plus another ISS within the CM" "Space Policy Sucks, while there's Life on Venus" "Ice Ages directly regulated by Sirius" "SETI/GUTH Venus, no kidding" "Terraforming the moon" "Relocate ISS to ME-L1" Relocation of ISS to ME-L1 is certainly much easier said than done, but at least it's something that's been doable. Regards, Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Space Calendar - April 30, 2004 | Ron | Astronomy Misc | 0 | April 30th 04 03:55 PM |
Space Calendar - April 30, 2004 | Ron | Misc | 0 | April 30th 04 03:55 PM |
The apollo faq | the inquirer | Astronomy Misc | 11 | April 22nd 04 06:23 AM |
The apollo faq | the inquirer | Misc | 4 | April 15th 04 04:45 AM |
The Apollo FAQ (moon landings were faked) | Nathan Jones | UK Astronomy | 8 | February 4th 04 06:48 PM |