Possible 2014 comet impact to Mars could make it habitable.

Speculation here that such an impact could make Mars habitable:

Rush to Mars: Comet impact could make Red Planet inhabitable.
Published time: February 28, 2013 16:32
http://rt.com/news/mars-comet-tito-flyby-601/


Bob Clark

Cross-posts elided...

On 3/5/2013 11:31 AM, Robert Clark wrote:
Speculation here that such an impact could make Mars habitable:


Title says otherwise?

Rush to Mars: Comet impact could make Red Planet inhabitable.
Published time: February 28, 2013 16:32
http://rt.com/news/mars-comet-tito-flyby-601/

I think we should hope for a miss. Geologic time scales for climate
change on Mars to complete a 'terraform' would not be a boon for human
exploration.

Dave

On Mar 5, 11:45*am, David Spain wrote:
Cross-posts elided...

On 3/5/2013 11:31 AM, Robert Clark wrote:

Speculation here that such an impact could make Mars habitable:

Title says otherwise?

Rush to Mars: Comet impact could make Red Planet inhabitable.
Published time: February 28, 2013 16:32
http://rt.com/news/mars-comet-tito-flyby-601/

I think we should hope for a miss. Geologic time scales for climate
change on Mars to complete a 'terraform' would not be a boon for human
exploration.


Habitable and inhabitable are used interchangeably, like flammable
and inflammable. The opposite term is uninhabitable.

Bob Clark

On 3/5/2013 2:12 PM, Robert Clark wrote:
Habitable and inhabitable are used interchangeably, like flammable
and inflammable. The opposite term is uninhabitable.

Bob Clark


Ah, right you are...

"David Spain" wrote in message
...

On 3/5/2013 2:12 PM, Robert Clark wrote:
Habitable and inhabitable are used interchangeably, like flammable
and inflammable. The opposite term is uninhabitable.

Bob Clark


Ah, right you are...

Well technically inflammable means VERY flammable. It's an intensifier.

I suppose that means Anchorage AK is habitable, but Honolulu is inhabitable
:-)





--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

It's a nice thought but Mars is just too small for a comet impact to do much good. Think about it: over the last 4 billion years, Mars has been repeatedly hit by comets, just like Earth and while they were probably able to deliver enough water and atmospheric gasses to keep that water liquid for an extended period - long enough to form various minerals which can ONLY form in the presence of hot, liquid water!

However, there are two things Mars doesn't have that the Earth does which allowed Earth to keep most of it's water and atmosphe it's magnetic field and it's size. To address the latter first, you can and I did, do some quick back-of-the-envelope calculations to show that Mars is simply not large enough to hold onto gaseous nitrogen and nitrogen is critical to the formation of life as it's absolutely necessary for any kind of long-chain reproductive molecule, like RNA/DNA and it's also necessary to create the substrate molecules that form the workhorse protein molecules that get things done in the cell. The first issue formed as a result of Hadean-Earth hitting a Mars-sized object which blew off a good-chunk of the Earth's crust into space, formed the moon, started the earth spinning, and left the earth big enough to hold onto it's nitrogen gas. Moreover, because space is extremely insulating, all that kinetic energy was stored in the core and has been oozing out onto the crust as lava flows and volcanoes ever since - well, it had radioactive decay to help it out, but Mercury is nothing BUT a core of radioactive elements and it's no longer liquid rock. Further, Venus has a lot of the same things going for it as the earth with the exception that Venus no longer spins to any meaningful amount. As a result, it's lost it's magnetic field and the gas it has is slowly losing it's atmosphere to solar radiation. If this had been going on for the last 4 billion years, Venus would be a barren rock today. It's not. Ergo, at one point in the not too distant past - like the last couple-few million years, it was almost earth's twin with a moon, an atmosphere, liquid, but hot, water, and likely life of some sort. I would speculate, however, that the moon rotated in a retrograde orbit which deteriorated, was pulled apart by Venus' gravity and impacted all over Venus, destroying it's life, it's atmosphere, and it's magnetic field as the impacts of millions of asteroids slowed the planet down like pellets fired at a revolving wax drum. All those weird pancake-like structures they've found on Venus are simply meteor-impacts filled with magma.

On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 8:31:02 AM UTC-8, Robert Clark wrote:
Speculation here that such an impact could make Mars habitable:



Rush to Mars: Comet impact could make Red Planet inhabitable.

Published time: February 28, 2013 16:32

http://rt.com/news/mars-comet-tito-flyby-601/





Bob Clark

Well, it might make it less hostile whether to even a meaningful degree
is debatable.

If Mars had been bigger perhaps a bit bigger than Earth and
had it had a moon similar to Earth's moon, I suppose it might
have managed a sort of 'habitable' environment. This of course
is the habitable zone discussion and Mars is just too small.
Perhaps 4 billion years with a still very active magnetic field
Mars might have been more interesting, if this meant a three bar
atmosphere as an insulating blanket. As a wildly eye guess for
it would really take.

As it stands, Mars means tunnels or perhaps domes with perhaps a
Star Wars defence/defense system for space rocks for a permanent colony.

making fire or just friction..............Trig

On Mar 5, 6:31*pm, Nun Giver wrote:
On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 8:31:02 AM UTC-8, Robert Clark wrote:
Speculation here that such an impact could make Mars habitable:

Rush to Mars: Comet impact could make Red Planet inhabitable.

Published time: February 28, 2013 16:32

http://rt.com/news/mars-comet-tito-flyby-601/

* Bob Clark

Well, it might make it less hostile whether to even a meaningful degree
is debatable.

If Mars had been bigger perhaps a bit bigger than Earth and
had it had a moon similar to Earth's moon, I suppose it might
have managed a sort of 'habitable' environment. This of course
is the habitable zone discussion and Mars is just too small.
Perhaps 4 billion years with a still very active magnetic field
Mars might have been more interesting, if this meant a three bar
atmosphere as an insulating blanket. As a wildly eye guess for
it would really take.

As it stands, Mars means tunnels or perhaps domes with perhaps a
Star Wars defence/defense system for space rocks for a permanent colony.

making fire or just friction..............Trig

http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1985/1985_Stothers.pdf

It appears we may be entering a littered area of space......

every 64 million years life on earth gets largely wiped out

In article ,
wrote:

It's a nice thought but Mars is just too small for a comet impact to do much
good. Think about it: over the last 4 billion years, Mars has been
repeatedly hit by comets, just like Earth and while they were probably able
to deliver enough water and atmospheric gasses to keep that water liquid for
an extended period - long enough to form various minerals which can ONLY form
in the presence of hot, liquid water!

However, there are two things Mars doesn't have that the Earth does which
allowed Earth to keep most of it's water and atmosphe it's magnetic field
and it's size. To address the latter first, you can and I did, do some quick
back-of-the-envelope calculations to show that Mars is simply not large
enough to hold onto gaseous nitrogen and nitrogen is critical to the
formation of life as it's absolutely necessary for any kind of long-chain
reproductive molecule, like RNA/DNA and it's also necessary to create the
substrate molecules that form the workhorse protein molecules that get things
done in the cell. The first issue formed as a result of Hadean-Earth hitting
a Mars-sized object which blew off a good-chunk of the Earth's crust into
space, formed the moon, started the earth spinning, and left the earth big
enough to hold onto it's nitrogen gas. Moreover, because space is extremely
insulating, all that kinetic energy was stored in the core and has been
oozing out onto the crust as lava flows and volcanoes ever since - well, it
had radioactive decay to help it out, but Mercury is nothing BUT a core of
radioactive elements and it's no longer liquid rock. Further, Venus has a
lot of the same things going for it as the earth with the exception that
Venus no longer spins to any meaningful amount. As a result, it's lost it's
magnetic field and the gas it has is slowly losing it's atmosphere to solar
radiation. If this had been going on for the last 4 billion years, Venus
would be a barren rock today. It's not. Ergo, at one point in the not too
distant past - like the last couple-few million years, it was almost earth's
twin with a moon, an atmosphere, liquid, but hot, water, and likely life of
some sort. I would speculate, however, that the moon rotated in a retrograde
orbit which deteriorated, was pulled apart by Venus' gravity and impacted all
over Venus, destroying it's life, it's atmosphere, and it's magnetic field as
the impacts of millions of asteroids slowed the planet down like pellets
fired at a revolving wax drum. All those weird pancake-like structures
they've found on Venus are simply meteor-impacts filled with magma.

Is that you, George?

Greg (Strider) Moore used his keyboard to write :
"David Spain" wrote in message
...

On 3/5/2013 2:12 PM, Robert Clark wrote:
Habitable and inhabitable are used interchangeably, like flammable
and inflammable. The opposite term is uninhabitable.

Bob Clark


Ah, right you are...

Well technically inflammable means VERY flammable. It's an intensifier.

I thought flammable was a back-formation, and that imflammable was the
older word. Have those naughty posters over in AUE been lying to me
again?


I suppose that means Anchorage AK is habitable, but Honolulu is inhabitable
:-)

Depends on how claustophobic you are, I suppose.

/dps

--
I have always been glad we weren't killed that night. I do not know
any particular reason, but I have always been glad.
_Roughing It_, Mark Twain