|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Discussion on sci.space.science
Jeff Findley and I have been having on sci.space.science a discussion about water on Mars and terraforming Mars, that I appreciate very much. Nobody else is contributing to the discussion, possibly because some of you have given up on sci.space.science. So if you haven't checked on sci.space.science for a while, I encourage you to go check it out. And if you want to contribute to the discussion, that would be great. Alain Fournier |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Discussion on sci.space.science
Alain Fournier wrote on Wed, 1 Aug 2018
19:43:57 -0400: Jeff Findley and I have been having on sci.space.science a discussion about water on Mars and terraforming Mars, that I appreciate very much. Nobody else is contributing to the discussion, possibly because some of you have given up on sci.space.science. So if you haven't checked on sci.space.science for a while, I encourage you to go check it out. And if you want to contribute to the discussion, that would be great. All well and good, but it doesn't seem to let me post there, which is why I gave up on it way back when. -- "It's always different. It's always complex. But at some point, somebody has to draw the line. And that somebody is always me.... I am the law." -- Buffy, The Vampire Slayer |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Discussion on sci.space.science
On Thursday, August 2, 2018 at 4:14:49 AM UTC-4, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Alain Fournier wrote on Wed, 1 Aug 2018 19:43:57 -0400: Jeff Findley and I have been having on sci.space.science a discussion about water on Mars and terraforming Mars, that I appreciate very much. Nobody else is contributing to the discussion, possibly because some of you have given up on sci.space.science. So if you haven't checked on sci.space.science for a while, I encourage you to go check it out. And if you want to contribute to the discussion, that would be great. All well and good, but it doesn't seem to let me post there, which is why I gave up on it way back when. Terraforming Mars is one of those religious arguments, anyhow. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Discussion on sci.space.science
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Discussion on sci.space.science
On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 7:43:58 PM UTC-4, Alain Fournier wrote:
Jeff Findley and I have been having on sci.space.science a discussion about water on Mars and terraforming Mars, that I appreciate very much. Nobody else is contributing to the discussion, possibly because some of you have given up on sci.space.science. So if you haven't checked on sci.space.science for a while, I encourage you to go check it out. And if you want to contribute to the discussion, that would be great. Alain Fournier Thanks for the heads up. I'll take a look. Bob Clark |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Discussion on sci.space.science
Jeff Findley wrote on Thu, 2 Aug 2018
07:34:20 -0400: In article , says... On Thursday, August 2, 2018 at 4:14:49 AM UTC-4, Fred J. McCall wrote: Alain Fournier wrote on Wed, 1 Aug 2018 19:43:57 -0400: Jeff Findley and I have been having on sci.space.science a discussion about water on Mars and terraforming Mars, that I appreciate very much. Nobody else is contributing to the discussion, possibly because some of you have given up on sci.space.science. So if you haven't checked on sci.space.science for a while, I encourage you to go check it out. And if you want to contribute to the discussion, that would be great. All well and good, but it doesn't seem to let me post there, which is why I gave up on it way back when. Terraforming Mars is one of those religious arguments, anyhow. True. But my guess is that Mars will prove lifeless. If that's the case, who's going to object to terraforming a lifeless planet? Nothing fundamental in physics to stop humans from doing it. It will surely take centuries or more to do it, but there should be more than enough material in the solar system to do it. Mostly Mars needs volatiles to recreate a thicker atmosphere. Once you get it up to 5 psi, you can walk around in breathing masks and (relatively) normal clothing. I've seen articles recently where NASA is apparently claiming that it is not possible to terraform Mars. I haven't actually read the articles to see what their reasoning is, but the only reason I can think of is that it just won't hold enough atmosphere, no matter how hard you shovel stuff in (which seems odd to me). -- "Rule Number One for Slayers - Don't die." -- Buffy, the Vampire Slayer |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Discussion on sci.space.science
Fred J. McCall wrote on Thu, 02 Aug 2018 01:14:48
-0700: Alain Fournier wrote on Wed, 1 Aug 2018 19:43:57 -0400: Jeff Findley and I have been having on sci.space.science a discussion about water on Mars and terraforming Mars, that I appreciate very much. Nobody else is contributing to the discussion, possibly because some of you have given up on sci.space.science. So if you haven't checked on sci.space.science for a while, I encourage you to go check it out. And if you want to contribute to the discussion, that would be great. All well and good, but it doesn't seem to let me post there, which is why I gave up on it way back when. OK, I take it back. It did eventually show up, so I guess it's working again. -- "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." --George Bernard Shaw |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Discussion on sci.space.science
Le Aug/2/2018 Ã* 11:41 PM, Scott M. Kozel a écritÂ*:
On Thursday, August 2, 2018 at 7:34:27 AM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote: In article , says... Terraforming Mars is one of those religious arguments, anyhow. True. But my guess is that Mars will prove lifeless. If that's the case, who's going to object to terraforming a lifeless planet? Nothing fundamental in physics to stop humans from doing it. It will surely take centuries or more to do it, but there should be more than enough material in the solar system to do it. Mostly Mars needs volatiles to recreate a thicker atmosphere. Once you get it up to 5 psi, you can walk around in breathing masks and (relatively) normal clothing. I forget how many octillion tons of oxygen it would take, but the problem is getting it there in the needed quantities and then keeping it there. Not many octillions, less than a trillionth of an octillion tons. An octillion is a somewhat large number (that's using the short scale, the long scale would be even worse). But yes, it is true that many trillion tons of O2 is a lot of O2. Keeping it there isn't really the problem. It will be blown away by solar wind as Mars' original atmosphere was. But that happens on a time scale of millions of years. If you can't replenish it on that time scale, it basically means that you couldn't put it there in the first place. No one is going to start adding O2 to Mars with the plan of having completed the job in a million years. Alain Fournier |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Discussion on sci.space.science
On Friday, August 3, 2018 at 6:11:56 AM UTC-4, Alain Fournier wrote:
Le Aug/2/2018 Ã* 11:41 PM, Scott M. Kozel a écritÂ*: On Thursday, August 2, 2018 at 7:34:27 AM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote: In article , says... Terraforming Mars is one of those religious arguments, anyhow. True. But my guess is that Mars will prove lifeless. If that's the case, who's going to object to terraforming a lifeless planet? Nothing fundamental in physics to stop humans from doing it. It will surely take centuries or more to do it, but there should be more than enough material in the solar system to do it. Mostly Mars needs volatiles to recreate a thicker atmosphere. Once you get it up to 5 psi, you can walk around in breathing masks and (relatively) normal clothing. I forget how many octillion tons of oxygen it would take, but the problem is getting it there in the needed quantities and then keeping it there. Not many octillions, less than a trillionth of an octillion tons. An octillion is a somewhat large number (that's using the short scale, the long scale would be even worse). But yes, it is true that many trillion tons of O2 is a lot of O2. Keeping it there isn't really the problem. It will be blown away by solar wind as Mars' original atmosphere was. But that happens on a time scale of millions of years. If you can't replenish it on that time scale, it basically means that you couldn't put it there in the first place. No one is going to start adding O2 to Mars with the plan of having completed the job in a million years. A trillionth of an octillion tons would be in the quintillions. Nobody knows what did or would take place in millions of years, as nobody has any such observational span. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I am stunned theres so little discussion here about the space suit malfunction | bob haller | Policy | 2 | December 25th 13 04:12 AM |
Great Griffin/ESAS Discussion At Space Politics | Rand Simberg[_1_] | Policy | 24 | May 23rd 07 07:21 PM |
sci.space.tech and sci.space.science Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | s.s.t moderator | Policy | 0 | April 18th 04 11:59 AM |
sci.space.tech and sci.space.science Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | s.s.t moderator | Policy | 0 | February 29th 04 12:00 PM |
sci.space.tech and sci.space.science Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | s.s.t moderator | Policy | 0 | February 22nd 04 12:00 PM |