Titan Question Via the Moon

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

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.

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.

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

"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