How about this:
At some point in the future, whether it's economically viable or not,
a large group of people decide to terraform Mars. Can they do it
without High Frontier? I suspect not.
on the planet surface, at first, and maybe five thousand in Mars
orbit. Those living on Mars have a life not all that different from
life in a Moonbase. Those living in orbit have the standard Earthlike
habitat conditions.
A hundred or so years later, there are nearly a hundred thousand
living in orbit. Most of this is immigration. Some of the orbital
habitats enclose up to five hundred square miles (there are a few
bigger ones elsewhere in the Solar System). The orbital population
enjoys one of the highest standards of living in the Solar System.
Perhaps twenty-five thousand people are living on Mars, again mostly
from immigration. As those on Mars consider cost effectiveness to be
a secondary consideration, they have built roofed-over canyon
sections, domed-over craters, and the like. Some enclose two hundred
square kilometres or more. The terraforming has gone far enough that
you can go outside with Arctic gear and oxygen masks.
Another hundred years, and there is nearly as much habital area
orbiting Mars as there is total surface area on the planet itself.
There could be more, but a lot of the orbital population's effort has
gone into the terraforming project. The orbital population is over a
million.
On Mars, where the population is now over one hundred fifty thousand,
we find that at sea level it is possible to go about without oxygen
masks, if you don't exert yourself too much. Surface habitats consist
of gigantic tents, hundreds of square kilometres, with fans forcing in
air to bring the pressure up. This pressure keeps the tents inflated,
and also makes the air breathable, even under exertion.
And yes, there is a sea level, though at this point the seas are more
like lakes. Eventually, the seas will take up a quarter of the
planet, mostly in the northern hemisphere (this doesn't count the
subterrainian sea at the south pole, where the air pressure is
naturally high enough not to require fans. This seacoast is one of
the most populous parts of the planet, though some claim that living
underground defeats the purpose of terraformation).
OK. Another hundred years, three hundred years from the start of
terraforming. There are over a million people living on Mars. The
tents are gone, except at higher altitudes. The terraformation won't
be truly complete for another hundred years, but you'd never know it
for the most part. The planet is conducting a booming tourist trade,
with themes ranging from pilgramages made by a cult of
"warrior-priests" to people wanting to live the life of "John Carter,
Warlord of Mars" (Green Men and Martian predators included, thanks to
advanced robotics), to those who just want to try planetary life.
The orbital population exceeds fifty million. There is some grumbling
about the requirement that was signed three hundred years ago, and
there are even brief outbreaks of violence, but in the end the
contract is honored. The habitats are arranged into two clusters, and
each cluster is enshrouded by a radiation shield, a spherical
radiation shield, designed so that from the surface of Mars it looks
like a natural moon. So now terraformed Mars has two "moons;" big
enough moons that Diemos looks as big from Mars as Luna appears from
Earth. Phobos looks twice as big. The orbits are also inclined to
75 so that these "moons" are visible from near the poles.
The Federated States of Mars includes the entire planet and both
"moons," with the political capital on the shores of the underground sea.
--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophile"
>
> How about this:
> At some point in the future, whether it's economically viable or not,
> a large group of people decide to terraform Mars. Can they do it
> without High Frontier? I suspect not.
The goals, largely common to space habitats and a terraformed Mars or
Venus, are noble and worthy. As a place to send colonists a
terraformed Mars is farther away than by self replication creating a
similar amount of living space by the equivelent of 'dividing' Model 3
cylinders. Terraforming is frought with scales of unknown difficulties
beyond the most simple objection I could raise: Human societies, and
indeed human civilizations, simply do not have lifetimes consistant
with projects requiring millenia to reach fruition.
I would overlay a scenerio something like what I annotate below as a
glimpse of possible complications of terraforming fantasies. Of course
it is the totally unforseen problems thar REALLY emerge to bite you!
>
> So here we are, terraforming Mars. There are a thousand or so people
> on the planet surface, at first, and maybe five thousand in Mars
> orbit.
A pressurized 'city' lives under the harsh present Martian
conditions. Atomic detonations, directed asteroid impacts, giant
orbiting 'Soletta' mirrors and attempted seeding of micro-organisms
take place in what are hoped will be a sequence effective in
influencing the final composition of the thickening atmosphere toward
habitable conditions. The program clearly will take an immense time,
herein is the fatal flaw in contemplating such lengthly tasks.
'Mars Migration' becomes a new movement once the giant 'O' Neill'
type space terrariums begin to provide confidence that closed
ecosystems are manageable, and predictions are confidently extended to
planetary scale. The atmospheric pressure of mars is by a momentous
effort brought to 10 percent Earthly prerssure a decade after
beginning the effort. As the largest yet mass of colonists are being
moved to position to be landed on Mars hurricane force winds scour the
planet and unforseen chemical reactions create enviornments toxic
enough to require protective suits in itself. Comparisons with
'Greenland' are bitterly made by the colonists arriving at a different
place than advertised.
The year is 2036, and the economy of the United States has undergone
a steady recovery after involvement in another round of redrawing the
maps of the Middle East and the contamination of the primary oil
fields in one of the intense associated wars. This is folded into the
'war of Islamic Aggression' which has cost over a million American
lives in the May 22 2014 atomic terrorist attacks. The subsequent loss
of several U.S. cities in the Third World War, flaring up after the
invasion of Taiwan by China, caused a depression and years of marshall
law but the traditional robustness of American industrial might again
reappeared, especially in the wake of the reshuffling of the world
economy by the sudden loss of the bulk of cheap Chinese imports. The
United States as we knew it is by then a place where invasive law
enforcement is everywhere, where every employer wants full disclosure
on every vice and affliction you may wish to hide, and where everyone
has to wear a locator device such as those on parole must wear today
(which O'Neill foretold).
Despite such draconian measures a rebellous younger generation
forsakes and tries to live outside the 'straight'society model, but
increasing efforts go into avoiding capture and 'reprogramming'.
Despite repressive measures the Central government of the US will have
lost control of much territory bordering Mexico, resulting in much of
the world redrawing maps with readjusted borders or at least with
dotted lines such as now appear between Yemen and Saudi Arabia, the
latter gone by then.
>
> A hundred or so years later, -snip-.
Despite efforts to 'shove' the developing Martian enviornment into
something comfortable to humans, a toxic mess is shrouding the
formally red planet. Violent storms cover less of the planet with the
traditional light ochre color as moisture in the atmosphere increases
along with the density. Numerous famous landscape features sag and
collapse along their edges as the CO2 permafrost melts. Perhaps 20
percent atmospheric pressure is achieved, steady but agonizingly slow
progress. Here and there catastrophic episodes of CO2 gas release
scour new 'river channels' here and there, one wiping out a domed city.
In the mean time, on Earth it is 2130, and the US has declined to the
point that its contribution to the space colonization effort has ebbed
to nearly nothing. Like the Russia of old, by then broken up into a
series of near feudal proncipalities, 'rocket scientists' labored
lovingly and with nearly no pay beyond physical sustainence to keep
the Dream alive, but they were mortal and were not replaced. The
standard of living has finally declined enough to make all space
travel seem fantastic to common people. Most of the support for the
Martian colony comes from space habitats by this time.
>
> Another hundred years, and there is nearly as much habital area
> orbiting Mars as there is total surface area on the planet itself.
> There could be more, but a lot of the orbital population's effort
has-snip-
The orbital habitats begin to see the wisdom of a space based as
opposed to planetary based infrastructure. The surviving crowded
sealed Martian settlements have to endure conditions more hostile than
those of the Earths moon, much of the surface having become a slimy
windswept version of the Dry Valleys of Antartica, with surprise
collapse pits causing catastrophic loss of life more than once. The
entire affair is increasingly viewed as a drain to the new vigorous
center of Human affairs, free space.
2230 A.C.E. The government of the US has broken down to the point
only a small region surrounding Washington still flies an abbreviated
version of the 'American Flag', like Constantinople in its role as a
dying flickering flame of classical civilization. The once proud
monuments, reconstructed from fragments with declining workmanship
eash time it is done, are roped off battered edifaces similar looking
to the Acropolis today. The countries of Western Europe are
maintaining a close knit viable but low key political union despite
peripheral damage from the past Middle East conflicts. South American
countries emerge, along with Australia, as the kind of industrial
behemoths the US and Germany were once known as. Space settlement ,
however, is low on the list of priorities for these new power blocs.
>
> OK. Another hundred years, three hundred years from the start of
> terraforming. -snip-
Mars is an inalterably chainged place from its original condition,
something that at least some are not happy with. The once red planet
is now largely gray muck covered morass with a few light orange desert
spots remaining, all partly hidden by broken clouds and greated
amounts of ground fogs. Some salty highly acidic swamps have emerged
in the lowlands but no large bodies of fresh water such as was once
hoped have formed. After centuries of throwing declining resources
into an unmanagably large problem, particularly on the biological
front, most of the attraction for Mars has faded. Indeed most of the
free spacers have a hard time knowing what the fuss was once about.
Mars fumes under the injuries suffered by the in retrospect blind
attempts to rework it, ending up neither the geologic paradise it once
was or the new world for Humanity dreamed of in the days of secular
thought on Earth.
On 2330 A.C.E. a third of the Human race has recently been wiped out
by an epidemic, with only a few colonies succumbing to disease spread
by invasions of fleeing refugees still able to reach orbit. The
standard of living for the survivors on Earth increases dramatically,
as they did for laborers in the wake of the Black Death, with the
ratio of workers to tasks tilting dramatically. China rises from the
radioactive ashes to re-emerges as the dominent World power once
again, persuing yet another inward focused consolidation of interior
bureaocrasies which makes outward reaching efforts unthinkable.
Ironically, a new Chinese canal project is started with time and
unlimited manpower available, demonstrating once again that only a
repressive strong government such as China can accomplish a task
requiring a thousand years, at the cost of a forcibly managed culture.
English becomes a nearly dead language in the northern hemisphere. In
Europe once again literacy declines to levels so low nobody cares
anymore and the churches take advantage of mass ignorance to their own
ends for another few centuries...The very rationale for once wanting
to leave Earth falls outside what the rulers want people to be
thinking about.
Well, I hate to rain on the Terraforming parade, but I believe some
variation of the possibilities presented above are more likely than
assuming familiar civilizations and societies can remain intact long
enough for such tasks to be nurtured through time scales greater than
the civilization that conceives such dreams. Counting on Human Nature
to change in order to get a job done is far more problematical than
tackling an engineering task we don't yet know how to accomplish.
Don Davis
--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Don Davis"
>
> --- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophile"
> wrote:
> >
> > How about this:
> > At some point in the future, whether it's economically viable or
not,
> > a large group of people decide to terraform Mars. Can they do it
> > without High Frontier? I suspect not.
>
> Can they do it WITH High Frontier... I suspect not.
> The goals, largely common to space habitats and a terraformed Mars
or
> Venus, are noble and worthy. As a place to send colonists a
> terraformed Mars is farther away than by self replication creating a
> similar amount of living space by the equivelent of 'dividing'
Model 3
> cylinders. Terraforming is frought with scales of unknown
difficulties
> beyond the most simple objection I could raise: Human societies, and
> indeed human civilizations, simply do not have lifetimes consistant
> with projects requiring millenia to reach fruition.
>
> I would overlay a scenerio something like what I annotate below
as a
> glimpse of possible complications of terraforming fantasies. Of
course
> it is the totally unforseen problems thar REALLY emerge to bite you!
>
> > So here we are, terraforming Mars. There are a thousand or so
people
> > on the planet surface, at first, and maybe five thousand in Mars
> > orbit.
....
>
> Well, I hate to rain on the Terraforming parade, but I believe
some
> variation of the possibilities presented above are more likely than
> assuming familiar civilizations and societies can remain intact long
> enough for such tasks to be nurtured through time scales greater
than
> the civilization that conceives such dreams. Counting on Human
Nature
> to change in order to get a job done is far more problematical than
> tackling an engineering task we don't yet know how to accomplish.
>
> Don Davis
initially everything is as you point out. up to the point where
things start to fall apart. at that point, i see ppl on earth
starting to get disenchanted with the whole mars thing, looking for
new and better things to spend their money on. at that point the
martian settlers realise that if anything is going to be done about
it, it will have to be they, themselfs that have to fix it. taking
one thing at a time, they will learn to adapt, and find fixes on
their own. slowly one after another of the spacers come to the
conclusion that they have more important things to be concerned with,
an mars is left more and more to their own resources.
one day many year, decades, centuries perhaps, later they are
surprised when a ship coming reaches them from mars. they will say
their records indicate that mars is uninhapited and uninhapitable.
those that come from mars are very different than those who stayed on
earth, or even those who inhabit the space stations. they are more
self assured (some will say arrigant), more standoffish, and somehow,
not quite as human. or perhaps more so. at some point, it will be
realised that, while they are of human ancestory, they are no longer
exactly human. they would have taken a planet that was incapable of
sustaining life, and by their own hands, twisted and bullied and
pushed and pulled, until the red planet is no longer quite as red,
and a little be more life sustaining. any that come from earth or
space, to visit will find it unconfortable, and unlivable, but those
who are born and bred to it, find it very much home.
I agree for the most part with the sentiments put forward here. I seldom post
to this group but may have in the past expressed these ideas in a different
way.
I and the people at 1000Planets are well along in design and construction of
a habitat unit to live on Mars (or Luna, or in space) that will house up to 30
people in a self sustaining way.
At 60 years old I do not now and never have had any faith that if we started
a settlement using 8 or more of these units, on Mars (100 to 250 people) that
anyone would ever follow us or help us if we could not go it alone.
We are designing to do everything ourselves but would hope that we would not
have to do so. I honestly believe that it would be very foolish to set out on
such a journey without the ability to survive without outside help.
practicing scientist on board. nor will there be any one who has been a practicing
teacher for more than 5 years in their lifetimes. Nor will there be anyone who
has an IQ of 145 or more unless that person is exceptional in life ways.
The people chosen to make the journey would be well developed generalist,
including the medical personal. Each person must have a wide range of knowledge
in at least 5 areas of life. One of which must be a general knowledge of
machinery and how it works.
There is more to this idea but I will stop here for the time being.
John Wayne Smith, CEO
1000Planets, Inc.
PS: See notice at the end of this message.
In a message dated 5/20/2006 12:56:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
dehammer@... writes:
> Personally I see a slightly different thing happening.
>
> initially everything is as you point out. up to the point where things start
> to fall apart. at that point, i see people on earth starting to get
> disenchanted with the whole Mars thing, looking for new and better things to spend
> their money on. at that point the Martian settlers realize that if anything is
> going to be done about it, it will have to be they, themselves that have to
> fix it. Taking one thing at a time, they will learn to adapt, and find fixes
> on their own. slowly one after another of the spacers come to the conclusion
> that they have more important things to be concerned with, a Mars is left
> more and more to their own resources.
>
> one day many year, decades, centuries perhaps, later they are surprised when
> a ship coming reaches them from Mars. they will say their records indicate
> that Mars is uninhabited and uninhabitable those that come from Mars are very
> different than those who stayed on earth, or even those who inhabit the space
> stations. they are more self assured (some will say arrogant), more
> standoffish, and somehow, not quite as human. or perhaps more so. at some point, it
> will be
> realized that, while they are of human ancestry, they are no longer exactly
> human. they would have taken a planet that was incapable of sustaining life,
> and by their own hands, twisted and bullied and pushed and pulled, until the
> red planet is no longer quite as red, and a little be more life sustaining.
> any that come from earth or space, to visit will find it uncomfortable, and
> unlivable, but those who are born and bred to it, find it very much home.
Many of you know that I am web illiterate and know little of the operations
of web related things.
Within the last 6 months the 1000 Planets e mail system or at least something
I would relate to the 1000Planets e mail system has became a vast and ugly
conduit for SPAM.
I have given my service provider and my web master until July 1, 2006 to
solve this problem. If the problem is not solved by that time there will no longer
be e mail originating at the 1000Planets site. If this does not solve the
problem the 1000Planets web site will be removed from the web.
That does not mean that I have gone away. I can always be reached at the
address above and I will continue to work on the current projects of 1000Planets,
Inc.
Since I am very much open source I will find a way to share the ideas
developed by 1000Planets, Inc.
I do not intend for this to become a topic of discussion here but if you wish
to discuss it e mail me directly.
John Wayne
i firmly beleive that any group that creates a place in space, be it
station or new planet, must go in with the atitude that if things got
tough with the connections to earth, they would be just fine. that
is not to say that they could not take in migrants, as long as the
fit the same atitude. nor does it mean they would not take new things
from earth, but they could not go in with the atitude that they were
indentured servants to earth either.
>
> I agree for the most part with the sentiments put forward here. I
seldom post
> to this group but may have in the past expressed these ideas in a
different
> way.
> I and the people at 1000Planets are well along in design and
construction of
> a habitat unit to live on Mars (or Luna, or in space) that will
house up to 30
> people in a self sustaining way.
> At 60 years old I do not now and never have had any faith that if
we started
> a settlement using 8 or more of these units, on Mars (100 to 250
people) that
> anyone would ever follow us or help us if we could not go it alone.
> We are designing to do everything ourselves but would hope that we
would not
> have to do so. I honestly believe that it would be very foolish to
set out on
> such a journey without the ability to survive without outside help.
>
> This is one reason why when we do finally launch there will not be
any
> practicing scientist on board. nor will there be any one who has
been a practicing
> teacher for more than 5 years in their lifetimes. Nor will there be
anyone who
> has an IQ of 145 or more unless that person is exceptional in life
ways.
> The people chosen to make the journey would be well developed
generalist,
> including the medical personal. Each person must have a wide range
of knowledge
> in at least 5 areas of life. One of which must be a general
knowledge of
> machinery and how it works.
>
> There is more to this idea but I will stop here for the time being.
>
> John Wayne Smith, CEO
> 1000Planets, Inc.
>
> PS: See notice at the end of this message.
>
> In a message dated 5/20/2006 12:56:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> dehammer@... writes:
>
> > Personally I see a slightly different thing happening.
> >
> > initially everything is as you point out. up to the point where
things start
> > to fall apart. at that point, i see people on earth starting to
get
> > disenchanted with the whole Mars thing, looking for new and
better things to spend
> > their money on. at that point the Martian settlers realize that
if anything is
> > going to be done about it, it will have to be they, themselves
that have to
> > fix it. Taking one thing at a time, they will learn to adapt, and
find fixes
> > on their own. slowly one after another of the spacers come to the
conclusion
> > that they have more important things to be concerned with, a Mars
is left
> > more and more to their own resources.
> >
> > one day many year, decades, centuries perhaps, later they are
surprised when
> > a ship coming reaches them from Mars. they will say their records
indicate
> > that Mars is uninhabited and uninhabitable those that come from
Mars are very
> > different than those who stayed on earth, or even those who
inhabit the space
> > stations. they are more self assured (some will say arrogant),
more
> > standoffish, and somehow, not quite as human. or perhaps more so.
at some point, it
> > will be
> > realized that, while they are of human ancestry, they are no
longer exactly
> > human. they would have taken a planet that was incapable of
sustaining life,
> > and by their own hands, twisted and bullied and pushed and
pulled, until the
> > red planet is no longer quite as red, and a little be more life
sustaining.
> > any that come from earth or space, to visit will find it
uncomfortable, and
> > unlivable, but those who are born and bred to it, find it very
much home.
>
> Many of you know that I am web illiterate and know little of the
operations
> of web related things.
> Within the last 6 months the 1000 Planets e mail system or at least
something
> I would relate to the 1000Planets e mail system has became a vast
and ugly
> conduit for SPAM.
> I have given my service provider and my web master until July 1,
2006 to
> solve this problem. If the problem is not solved by that time there
will no longer
> be e mail originating at the 1000Planets site. If this does not
solve the
> problem the 1000Planets web site will be removed from the web.
> That does not mean that I have gone away. I can always be reached
at the
> address above and I will continue to work on the current projects
of 1000Planets,
> Inc.
>
> Since I am very much open source I will find a way to share the
ideas
> developed by 1000Planets, Inc.
>
> I do not intend for this to become a topic of discussion here but
if you wish
In a message dated 5/20/2006 8:51:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
dehammer@... writes:
> station or new planet, must go in with the attitude that if things got tough with
> the connections to Earth, they would be just fine. That is not to say that
> they could not take in migrants, as long as the fit the same attitude nor does
> it mean they would not take new things from Earth, but they could not go in
> with the attitude that they were
> indentured servants to Earth either.
>
I can agree with this. Since this group is mostly off planet centric and I am
more planet centric I try to keep my post in measure with the groups aims. I
do learn things here but I will post this on planetary, specifically Mars
living.
I have an almost unique view of colonizing Mars. When we do colonize Mars we
will depend on orbiting habitats much more than on relying on Earth.
I do not believe that the population of Mars will ever be more than 20,000
people until we do completely terraform it. The settlements will not be like
anything that most people envision until it is terraformed. There will be no
large cities, surface or underground. The reason is because most of these kinds of
structures will not stand up under even lite bombardment by asteroids to
supply additional material for terraforming.
Most of the material to terraform Mars is already present on Mars and the
necessity of bombarding Mars with asteroids can be avoided for the most part.
Using currently available methods and appliances we can successfully colonize
Mars and build self sufficient orbiting habitats now. We should do this as
soon as the money allows. None of it will look like the pictures we have seen
but the installations will be functional and will lead to installations that
look somewhat the pictures we have all seen.
1000Planets, Inc. is working on this as hard and as fast as we can. We work
on the project a lot. We do not say a lot to the outside world, but when we are
ready we will do that.
John Wayne
--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, jwsmith42000@... wrote:
>
> I can agree with this. Since this group is mostly off planet
centric and I am
> more planet centric I try to keep my post in measure with the
groups aims. I
> do learn things here but I will post this on planetary,
specifically Mars
> living.
>
> I have an almost unique view of colonizing Mars. When we do
colonize Mars we
> will depend on orbiting habitats much more than on relying on
Earth.
> I do not believe that the population of Mars will ever be more than
20,000
> people until we do completely terraform it. The settlements will
not be like
> anything that most people envision until it is terraformed. There
will be no
> large cities, surface or underground. The reason is because most of
these kinds of
> structures will not stand up under even lite bombardment by
asteroids to
> supply additional material for terraforming.
>
> Most of the material to terraform Mars is already present on Mars
and the
> necessity of bombarding Mars with asteroids can be avoided for the
most part.
>
> Using currently available methods and appliances we can
successfully colonize
> Mars and build self sufficient orbiting habitats now. We should do
this as
> soon as the money allows. None of it will look like the pictures we
have seen
> but the installations will be functional and will lead to
installations that
> look somewhat the pictures we have all seen.
>
> 1000Planets, Inc. is working on this as hard and as fast as we can.
We work
> on the project a lot. We do not say a lot to the outside world, but
when we are
> ready we will do that.
>
> John Wayne
>
the big problem with terriforming mars, or even living there, is that
it has lost its van allen belt. a long time ago when there was water,
and air on the planet, and possibly life, it had a magnetic field,
which, like ours captured ion radiation and used it to protect the
planet. for some reason it disappeared. shortly after that it started
getting hit by asteroids that were not being slowed by the
atmosphere, indicating that much of the astmosphere had been lost.
this was most likely due to the solar winds. while they are weak,
they can over time strip a planet of much of its upper atmosphere. If
there could be a way of restoring that, and bringing in ice asteriods
and comets, the atmosphere could be restored and it would be liveable
without increasing the size of the planet by metal and rock asteroids.
Gr8 to hear that you would rely in space habitats for mars colonizaTION, outer space colonization and research mars colonies so that both space colonies and colonies on mars benifit from each other. We can think on this matter sir.
sincerely
Nittin
jwsmith42000@... wrote: In a message dated 5/20/2006 8:51:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
dehammer@... writes:
> I firmly believe that any group that creates a place in space, be it
> station or new planet, must go in with the attitude that if things got tough with
> the connections to Earth, they would be just fine. That is not to say that
> they could not take in migrants, as long as the fit the same attitude nor does
> it mean they would not take new things from Earth, but they could not go in
> with the attitude that they were
> indentured servants to Earth either.
>
I can agree with this. Since this group is mostly off planet centric and I am
more planet centric I try to keep my post in measure with the groups aims. I
do learn things here but I will post this on planetary, specifically Mars
living.
I have an almost unique view of colonizing Mars. When we do colonize Mars we
will depend on orbiting habitats much more than on relying on Earth.
I do not believe that the population of Mars will ever be more than 20,000
people until we do completely terraform it. The settlements will not be like
anything that most people envision until it is terraformed. There will be no
large cities, surface or underground. The reason is because most of these kinds of
structures will not stand up under even lite bombardment by asteroids to
supply additional material for terraforming.
Most of the material to terraform Mars is already present on Mars and the
necessity of bombarding Mars with asteroids can be avoided for the most part.
Using currently available methods and appliances we can successfully colonize
Mars and build self sufficient orbiting habitats now. We should do this as
soon as the money allows. None of it will look like the pictures we have seen
but the installations will be functional and will lead to installations that
look somewhat the pictures we have all seen.
1000Planets, Inc. is working on this as hard and as fast as we can. We work
on the project a lot. We do not say a lot to the outside world, but when we are
ready we will do that.
John Wayne
In a message dated 5/21/2006 3:31:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
dehammer@... writes:
> it has lost its van Allen belt.
> A long time ago when there was water, and air on the planet, and possibly
> life, it had a magnetic field, which, like ours captured ion radiation and
> used it to protect the planet. For some reason it disappeared. Shortly after
> that it started getting hit by asteroids that were not being slowed by the
> atmosphere, indicating that much of the atmosphere had been lost. This was most
> likely due to the solar winds. while they are weak, they can over time strip a
> planet of much of its upper atmosphere. If there could be a way of restoring
> that, and bringing in ice asteroids and comets, the atmosphere could be
> restored and it would be livable
> without increasing the size of the planet by metal and rock asteroids.
This is only one of the things we must address. With our increased knowledge
and discoveries in the past 20 years we have the answers and can get past this
and most all other problems effectively.
Mars does have a magnetic field although weak and shattered it does provide
some protection. Colonies could be built within one of the stronger field
areas. I do not have the link to a current map although I do have copies of it on
my computer.
I believe that we have overcome all of the supposed objections to living on
Mars in small well built settlements and in groups of such settlements.
Now we must find a way to get there.
John Wayne
On 5/21/06, Robert wrote:
(...)
> the big problem with terriforming mars, or even living there, is that
> it has lost its van allen belt. a long time ago when there was water,
> and air on the planet, and possibly life, it had a magnetic field,
> which, like ours captured ion radiation and used it to protect the
> planet. for some reason it disappeared. shortly after that it started
> getting hit by asteroids that were not being slowed by the
> atmosphere, indicating that much of the astmosphere had been lost.
> this was most likely due to the solar winds. while they are weak,
> they can over time strip a planet of much of its upper atmosphere. If
> there could be a way of restoring that, and bringing in ice asteriods
> and comets, the atmosphere could be restored and it would be liveable
> without increasing the size of the planet by metal and rock asteroids.
(...)
atmosphere that lasts for billions of years on Mars. Under the human,
historical perspective, an atmosphere that last for a few thousands of
years will do, and that does not require strong magnetic or
gravitational fields. And in case the atmosphere begins to thin again
and there is still a human civilization in there, Martians just have
to drop more comets of synthesize more air from rocks or whatever.
Living in a terraformed planet will be much like leaving in a really
big space colony. It will be an artificial environment that constantly
needs artificial care.
the problem with this attitude is that you assume that the humans
living there are going to be advanced enough to spot the problem in
time to do something about it. history is full of periods where man
civilizations have crumbled, and a new, better one has risen from the
ashes. what if the point where man needs to rebuild the atmosphere is
in the time between then or if the politicians are in to much
control, with their heads in the sand demanding that other things are
more important. By the time ppl realise that something has to be
done, its to late to rebuild the infrastructure to do so. in
addition, there is no way of knowing if the atmosphere would last
several thousand years. as far as scientist can tell the loss of the
atmosphere occurred in less than a single millenia, way to short a
time to do this again. also there is a limited number of asteroids
that could be used and in a thousand years, those might all
be "owned". that means there would be war over them.
wrote:
>
> As I have mentioned many times in the past, one does not need an
> atmosphere that lasts for billions of years on Mars. Under the
human,
> historical perspective, an atmosphere that last for a few thousands
of
> years will do, and that does not require strong magnetic or
> gravitational fields. And in case the atmosphere begins to thin
again
> and there is still a human civilization in there, Martians just have
> to drop more comets of synthesize more air from rocks or whatever.
>
> Living in a terraformed planet will be much like leaving in a really
> big space colony. It will be an artificial environment that
constantly
--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, jwsmith42000@... wrote:
>
> This is only one of the things we must address. With our increased
knowledge
> and discoveries in the past 20 years we have the answers and can
get past this
> and most all other problems effectively.
> Mars does have a magnetic field although weak and shattered it does
provide
> some protection. Colonies could be built within one of the stronger
field
> areas. I do not have the link to a current map although I do have
copies of it on
> my computer.
>
> I believe that we have overcome all of the supposed objections to
living on
> Mars in small well built settlements and in groups of such
settlements.
>
> Now we must find a way to get there.
>
> John Wayne
>
yes it is but one of many things that must be addressed, but it is
one of the primaries. once its done, the others become easier. as an
example, you said that there are areas of stronger protection. those
dont really have much protection because the main protection from
radiation comes from a combination of van allen belt and thicker
atomsphere. smaller, scattered weaker fields like what your claiming
would afford little better protection than the less protected areas,
because they dont have any better atomspheric protection. the van
allen belt would protect the atmosphere, keeping it from being swept
away. also the magnetic fields cant create a van allen belt like
protection because the wind would sweep it away faster than it can
build up.
Certainly there will be cases where a progressive civilization is
substituted by a decadent one, but then the original progressive
civilization that executed terraformation has no responsibility
whatsoever over the lack of care of their decadent successors. The
former would be heaping the fruits of the lack of responsibility that
they saw.
bodies like the Moon point to an atmospheric "life expectancy" over a
millennium. If you know any source that gives smaller life
expectancies, would you please supply the reference?
On 5/22/06, Robert wrote:
> the problem with this attitude is that you assume that the humans
> living there are going to be advanced enough to spot the problem in
> time to do something about it. history is full of periods where man
> civilizations have crumbled, and a new, better one has risen from the
> ashes. what if the point where man needs to rebuild the atmosphere is
> in the time between then or if the politicians are in to much
> control, with their heads in the sand demanding that other things are
> more important. By the time ppl realise that something has to be
> done, its to late to rebuild the infrastructure to do so. in
> addition, there is no way of knowing if the atmosphere would last
> several thousand years. as far as scientist can tell the loss of the
> atmosphere occurred in less than a single millenia, way to short a
> time to do this again. also there is a limited number of asteroids
> that could be used and in a thousand years, those might all
> be "owned". that means there would be war over them.
(...)
From: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com [mailto:spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lucio de Souza Coelho
> bodies like the Moon point to an atmospheric "life expectancy" over
> a millennium. If you know any source that gives smaller life
> expectancies, would you please supply the reference?
As jaundiced a view of terraforming as I have, I have to back up Lucio on this. I've read that an artificial atmosphere laid on the moon might last a million years. When I first hit the web, I tried to make the argument that a terraformed atmosphere on Mars wouldn't last long enough, and promptly got set straight by some people.
On the other hand, some people try to say terraforming is better because an orbital habitat will require constant maintenance. But I think terraformed planets will require some type of ongoing maintenance as well. The terraformer might argue that this maintenance might have a period of centuries or millennia while orbital habitat maintenance would have a period of decades or a century, but on the other hand the habitat maintenance would not be on a planetary scale. That means the habitat residents could probably easily afford to pay for it. On an entire planet, you might get into disputes about who should put up the effort or pay the bills if all residents of the planet will benefit whether they pay their share or not. And if changes are very slow and gradual, over the course of many generations, that might encourage ignoring the problem and passing it along.
But I think the proper argument to make against terraforming is not that it doesn't last long enough, but that it takes too long to implement, and even at the end of implementation still does not yield as Earthlike an environment as can be engineered inside an orbital habitat. (I'm thinking mostly about gravity and sunlight levels, there.)
Regards,
Mike Combs
On 5/22/06, Combs, Mike wrote:
(...)
> On the other hand, some people try to say terraforming is better because an orbital habitat will require constant maintenance. But I think terraformed planets will require some type of ongoing maintenance as well. The terraformer might argue that this maintenance might have a period of centuries or millennia while orbital habitat maintenance would have a period of decades or a century, but on the other hand the habitat maintenance would not be on a planetary scale. That means the habitat residents could probably easily afford to pay for it. On an entire planet, you might get into disputes about who should put up the effort or pay the bills if all residents of the planet will benefit whether they pay their share or not. And if changes are very slow and gradual, over the course of many generations, that might encourage ignoring the problem and passing it along.
(...)
between the nations about who (if anyone) is guilty of global warming
and who (if anyone) should take care of it.
im afraid i dont have any links to any of those studies.
that time frame. the larger the atmosphere, the more surface that is
exposed to the solar wind and the lower the gravity at that distance,
the more of it that is pulled away by the solar wind.
also the atituded that we are not responsible for our decendants is
like saying that we have enough oil to get by, there is no need to do
research to find alternatives because our decendants will have to do
the research or do without energy. by the time they need it, they dont
have time to do the research. I dont know about you, but a lot of us
want our children to have things better than us, not worse.
--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Lucio de Souza Coelho"
wrote: