Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Multi-planetary civilization: Mars & Moon but what's next?


  • Please log in to reply
74 replies to this topic

#21
Cosmic Cat

Cosmic Cat

    Hibernating

  • Validating
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,345 posts
  • Location-
According to Wikipedia, the to-do list to terraform Venus is... ■Reducing Venus's 450°C (850°F) surface temperature ■Eliminating most of the planet's dense 9.2 MPa (~91 atm) carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide atmosphere, via removal or conversion to some other form ■Addition of breathable oxygen to the atmosphere Furthermore, the following two changes would also be highly desirable: ■Establishing a day–night light cycle shorter than Venus's extant solar day (presently 116.75 Earth days) ■Establishing a planetary magnetic field or substitute for protection against solar and cosmic radiation

#22
Mashallah

Mashallah

    Transgender student

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • LocationSerbia

According to Wikipedia, the to-do list to terraform Venus is... ■Reducing Venus's 450°C (850°F) surface temperature ■Eliminating most of the planet's dense 9.2 MPa (~91 atm) carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide atmosphere, via removal or conversion to some other form ■Addition of breathable oxygen to the atmosphere Furthermore, the following two changes would also be highly desirable: ■Establishing a day–night light cycle shorter than Venus's extant solar day (presently 116.75 Earth days) ■Establishing a planetary magnetic field or substitute for protection against solar and cosmic radiation

 

Almost the same can be said about Mars. Yet, terraforming Venus is at the same time more useful and on about the same level of complexity. Do you get my point now?


I don't like being lied to, but I'm also tired of The Truth.

Man cannot remake himself without suffering, for he is both the marble and the sculptor.


#23
Craven

Craven

    Elephant in the forest

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,325 posts
  • LocationPoland, Cracow

Almost the same can be said about Mars. Yet, terraforming Venus is at the same time more useful and on about the same level of complexity. Do you get my point now?

You're joking right? Once again: You could settle on Mars now. It's technically possible. This very day. It is not possible now on Venus. Terraforming Venus is beyond any near/mid-term future timeframe. Same goes for settling on this toxic, acidic, volcanig, infernal hellhole.
"I walk alone and do no evil, having only a few wishes, just like an elephant in the forest."

"Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and you weep alone."

#24
Mashallah

Mashallah

    Transgender student

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • LocationSerbia

 

Almost the same can be said about Mars. Yet, terraforming Venus is at the same time more useful and on about the same level of complexity. Do you get my point now?

You're joking right? Once again: You could settle on Mars now. It's technically possible. This very day. It is not possible now on Venus. Terraforming Venus is beyond any near/mid-term future timeframe. Same goes for settling on this toxic, acidic, volcanig, infernal hellhole.

 

You can "settle" on Venus now, too. Floating colonies are possible.

But for any large-scale settling, you would need to fix the problems of the planet in BOTH cases.

Why do you keep ignoring half of my points and only address the rest? Please stop ignoring the following points:

1. Small-scale colonization is possible on both (though in different ways), but it's absolutely irrelevant anyway.

2. For large-scale colonization, you need to terraform either planet, with both terraformation projects being of comparable complexity, but with Venus terraformation being more useful in the long term.


I don't like being lied to, but I'm also tired of The Truth.

Man cannot remake himself without suffering, for he is both the marble and the sculptor.


#25
Craven

Craven

    Elephant in the forest

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,325 posts
  • LocationPoland, Cracow

You can "settle" on Venus now, too. Floating colonies are possible.

Not anytime soon. Unlike colonies on Mars.

But for any large-scale settling, you would need to fix the problems of the planet in BOTH cases.

But they aren't the same kind of problems and challenges.

1. Small-scale colonization is possible on both (though in different ways), but it's absolutely irrelevant anyway.

Not really. With self sustaining colonies you can have thousands of people working to terraform planet (but since transhumanism is coming our way I doubt we will terraform any planet.

2. For large-scale colonization, you need to terraform either planet, with both terraformation projects being of comparable complexity, but with Venus terraformation being more useful in the long term.

Complexity is not comparable. Venus is much harder to change. May be impossible due to geology, volcanic activity and lack of day-night cycle (very bad for climate). And lack of magnetic field may be a show stopper for both planets in terms of terraforming. But Mars could have large scale colonies without terraforming.
"I walk alone and do no evil, having only a few wishes, just like an elephant in the forest."

"Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and you weep alone."

#26
Cody930

Cody930

    An Apple Pie from Scratch

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,519 posts
  • LocationNew Jersey, US

 

1. Most people sleep indoors, so that's not a priority.

2. Never, but I suggested cooling it down enough for annoying stuff like acids to either simply condensate or even freeze.

3. I suggested leaving it to cool down. It might take years, but whatever. Waiting is simple.

4. How exactly? The same amount of heat is entering and leaving the system, it doesn't depend on the rotation.

5. That's the only real problem, but you'd face the same problem on Mars (it would only be quantitatively different and the solution would most likely be the same).

 

1. So completely isolate them from the outside? That's why Mars is preferable in this case because it basically has a normal day-night cycle relative to Earth. You wouldn't have to worry about maintaining an artificial cycle. 

2. Acid that would then sit on the surface. It's not like it has places to go beyond that. Don't know where you're expecting to move all of that. Still makes for a nasty environment.

3. A cool down would take way longer than a few years. Just heating a planet takes over a century (like our own climate change) but even that is to a few degrees. We're talking about cooling down hundreds of degrees. 

4. Of course but one side would constantly be heated creating a very polarized atmosphere with one side cooled down while the other is an inferno. A faster rotation helps balance the atmospheric extremes. 

5. Yes I understand Mars has the same problem but Mars doesn't come with all the extra baggage that Venus does. You're not gonna get a perfect pick regardless of what world we're going to settle on first. 


"Since we first emerged, a few million years ago in East Africa, we have meandered our way around the planet. There are now people on every continent and the remotest islands, from pole to pole, from Mount Everest to the Dead Sea, on the ocean bottoms and even, occasionally, in residence 200 miles up - humans, like the gods of old, living in the sky."


#27
Craven

Craven

    Elephant in the forest

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,325 posts
  • LocationPoland, Cracow
Not to mention, that cooling Venus down by 440'C would require insane endavour on planetary scale. Venus is hotter than Mercury!
"I walk alone and do no evil, having only a few wishes, just like an elephant in the forest."

"Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and you weep alone."

#28
Raklian

Raklian

    An Immortal In The Making

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,051 posts
  • LocationRaleigh, NC

Day/night cycles could be artificially simulated by blocking radiation from the Sun using gigantic shields stationed between it and Venus, but that would still require enormous amount of energy.

 

This is relatively a small problem compared to what would need to be done on the planet itself.


What are you without the sum of your parts?

#29
PrimordialBeing

PrimordialBeing

    Why are you bothering to look at this? Go read my post.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,468 posts

Not to mention, that cooling Venus down by 440'C would require insane endavour on planetary scale. Venus is hotter than Mercury!

I think I'll go with what you're saying, as you seem to know a lot more about planets and everything to do with them, when those things can be done etc.
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for life" -Terry Pratchett
"And when you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you"-Friedrich Nietzsche
"The biggest risk is not taking any risk.. In a world that is changing quickly, the only strategy that is guaranteed to fail is not taking risks* - Mark Zuckerberg

#30
Cody930

Cody930

    An Apple Pie from Scratch

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,519 posts
  • LocationNew Jersey, US

Day/night cycles could be artificially simulated by blocking radiation from the Sun using gigantic shields stationed between it and Venus, but that would still require enormous amount of energy.

 

This is relatively a small problem compared to what would need to be done on the planet itself.

 

That's kinda what I was getting at with this point. We could do a simulation but lot of energy is needed. It's easier if this is already a given like Mars. 


"Since we first emerged, a few million years ago in East Africa, we have meandered our way around the planet. There are now people on every continent and the remotest islands, from pole to pole, from Mount Everest to the Dead Sea, on the ocean bottoms and even, occasionally, in residence 200 miles up - humans, like the gods of old, living in the sky."


#31
Raklian

Raklian

    An Immortal In The Making

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,051 posts
  • LocationRaleigh, NC

If we can wield this amount of energy, why do we have to live on planets when it is more efficient to use the energy for other uses? Some would say we could use it to construct a Dyson sphere but something tells me we will think of something better when we reach that level of technological sophistication.


What are you without the sum of your parts?

#32
GenX

GenX

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,045 posts
  • LocationSo Cal

Day/night cycles could be artificially simulated by blocking radiation from the Sun using gigantic shields stationed between it and Venus, but that would still require enormous amount of energy.

 

This is relatively a small problem compared to what would need to be done on the planet itself.

Yeah, it just seems like it's not worth the amount of money and energy required.  Think of how many micrometeorites hit the Earth every day.  These shields would have to be designed to handle the hundreds and hundreds of small and medium impacts that they would have to deal with on a daily basis. 


The only thing we ever want is more


#33
Mashallah

Mashallah

    Transgender student

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • LocationSerbia

 

1. So completely isolate them from the outside? That's why Mars is preferable in this case because it basically has a normal day-night cycle relative to Earth. You wouldn't have to worry about maintaining an artificial cycle. 

2. Acid that would then sit on the surface. It's not like it has places to go beyond that. Don't know where you're expecting to move all of that. Still makes for a nasty environment.

3. A cool down would take way longer than a few years. Just heating a planet takes over a century (like our own climate change) but even that is to a few degrees. We're talking about cooling down hundreds of degrees. 

4. Of course but one side would constantly be heated creating a very polarized atmosphere with one side cooled down while the other is an inferno. A faster rotation helps balance the atmospheric extremes. 

5. Yes I understand Mars has the same problem but Mars doesn't come with all the extra baggage that Venus does. You're not gonna get a perfect pick regardless of what world we're going to settle on first. 

 

1. I didn't imply compete isolation. I only implied that they can sleep indoors just like they, you know, did on Earth.

2. Still solvable.

3. The time it'll take depends only on how much light you can reflect. If you could reflect all light, it would probably even take under a single year.

4. First, wind exists. Second, if you reflected a large portion of the light, why would that happen anyway? Both sides would cool down.

5. Mars has his own baggage of problems. You need to increase atmospheric density, still deal with the same radiation problem and somehow deal with the lower gravity (Venus has Earth-like gravity). Decreased gravity poses serious health risks to humans.

 

 

1. Not anytime soon. Unlike colonies on Mars. 2. But they aren't the same kind of problems and challenges. 3. Not really. With self sustaining colonies you can have thousands of people working to terraform planet (but since transhumanism is coming our way I doubt we will terraform any planet. 4. Complexity is not comparable. Venus is much harder to change. May be impossible due to geology, volcanic activity and lack of day-night cycle (very bad for climate). And lack of magnetic field may be a show stopper for both planets in terms of terraforming. But Mars could have large scale colonies without terraforming.

 

1. Why?

2. Comparable complexity. In one case, you need to get rid of the atmosphere. In the other case, you need to make an atmosphere. In one case, you need to cool the planet down. In the other case, you need to heat the planet up. All in all, the difficulty is around the same.

3. Resources wielded by a small colony are negligible in comparison to resources of Earth countries.

4. See point 2. By the way, it's not even confirmed that Venus is currently volcanic, it's possible that it simply went through large-scale flood basalt eruptions similar to those that occurred at the Permian-Triassic extinction. Also, I don't think large scale colonies without terraforming will be viable. (Except for the case of transhumanism, but in that case, colonizing Venus without terraforming will also be quite possible.)


I don't like being lied to, but I'm also tired of The Truth.

Man cannot remake himself without suffering, for he is both the marble and the sculptor.


#34
Cosmic Cat

Cosmic Cat

    Hibernating

  • Validating
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,345 posts
  • Location-

This is what Venus's surface looks like. The images were taken from the Venera landers. It's really scary how "real" planets are. They seem so real in a thought that I've never seen them realistically and are new to my small world. You really get the feeling like "Wow, That's what other worlds look like with photo realistic photos instead of paintings". It's really beautiful.

 

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Next one is a composite image from the Venera 13 lander images.

 

Posted Image

This next one is from the Venera 14 lander. It is a composite image.

 

Posted Image

 

And these are Nasa's computer generated models of Eistla Regio

 

Posted Image

Posted Image

 

 

All in all it looks like Hawaii. In fact it looks perfectly like it in terms of look near the volcanoes.  I'm surprised it's 450 degrees Celsius.



#35
Craven

Craven

    Elephant in the forest

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,325 posts
  • LocationPoland, Cracow

1. Why?

Look outside your window and tell me if how many floating cities you see.  

2. Comparable complexity. In one case, you need to get rid of the atmosphere. In the other case, you need to make an atmosphere. In one case, you need to cool the planet down. In the other case, you need to heat the planet up. All in all, the difficulty is around the same.

You are dead wrong. If I need to explain to you, that it's 460'C on Venus, and it was warmer on parts of Mars than in parts of Canada this year, then I just don't see point of this discussion. You are either ignorant, or just trolling. So I'm out. Have fun with floating cities and making Venus a habitable place.
"I walk alone and do no evil, having only a few wishes, just like an elephant in the forest."

"Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and you weep alone."

#36
Cody930

Cody930

    An Apple Pie from Scratch

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,519 posts
  • LocationNew Jersey, US

 

1. I didn't imply compete isolation. I only implied that they can sleep indoors just like they, you know, did on Earth.

2. Still solvable.

3. The time it'll take depends only on how much light you can reflect. If you could reflect all light, it would probably even take under a single year.

4. First, wind exists. Second, if you reflected a large portion of the light, why would that happen anyway? Both sides would cool down.

5. Mars has his own baggage of problems. You need to increase atmospheric density, still deal with the same radiation problem and somehow deal with the lower gravity (Venus has Earth-like gravity). Decreased gravity poses serious health risks to humans.

 

1. Well I kinda clarified this in a later post with Raklian so refer to those. It's just easier with Mars since it's a given.
 
2. So what's the plan then? 
 
3. That's going to require a mighty amount of energy.
 
4. I know wind exists Lol. Extreme heating and extreme cooling on each side of the planet will cause a really sharp gradient resulting in really extreme storms and wind belts. As for the reflecting light, sure but refer to number 3. Alas though too remember that Venus's atmosphere alone already reflects a whopping 70% of solar radiation and thanks to the atmospheric setup it's more efficient at trapping heat. Its surface is hot and would absorb a good chunk of that alone without so much cloud cover as well as near-constant heating. With one side constantly facing the sun and the additional solar radiation, you still end up with an increasingly hot environment. 
 
5. That's no where near the baggage of Venus. Atmospheric density isn't exactly as much of a problem on Mars as it is with Venus's in terms of terraforming. Mars ~0.020 kg/m3, Earth ~1.2 km/m3, Venus ~67 kg/m3. Very sharp difference with Venus due to the shear amount of gas that'd have to be removed. Doesn't matter how you put it; Mars is still more Earth-like relative to Venus because of that smaller difference. As for radiation yes this a problem in both places and even in interplanetary flight. That's been under research for quite a bit now. As for gravity, that's also something that has to be considered but keep in mind we understand the effects of microgravity but we don't really have information on the effects of Martian gravity.

"Since we first emerged, a few million years ago in East Africa, we have meandered our way around the planet. There are now people on every continent and the remotest islands, from pole to pole, from Mount Everest to the Dead Sea, on the ocean bottoms and even, occasionally, in residence 200 miles up - humans, like the gods of old, living in the sky."


#37
kjaggard

kjaggard

    Artificer

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,003 posts
  • Locationwhere fanciful imaginings and hard won knowledge meet to genesis the future.

Hey, I love the idea of floating venusian cities as much as the next guy. But I need you to show me either one city sized air tight floating habitat that can stand the wind speeds and acidic environment as well as several hundred degree temperatures for years on end, or mutiple small versions that could cluster like cities.

 

Mars is easier by lightyears:

 

We can build structures that hold atmosphere in against vacuum and insulate against cold. (which is another thing, you don't actually think you can just run an air conditioner on venus do you? we can insulate and run a heater on mars)

 

The wind speed can cause dust storms on mars so fierce they might turn the pages of a book, winds on venus would shred you space suits in minutes with heat and acid and volcanic ash (which is a micro abrassive).

 

Light levels and rotational day length on mars make solar and communications easier.

 

take off an landing on the planet are far easier on mars.

 

You can freeze tanks of water on the surface of mars for storage and use.

 

Water is actually destroyed on venus. You can mine water from mars and asteroids.

 

Mars has two way stations to use in setting up asteroid mining sites and communications relays venus has no moons.

 

Mars has lower gravity which makes coming and going easier and possibly setting up a space elevator easier than even earth.

 

Venus has a crust so thin over it's molten core that it's like ice over a deep lake, mars you don't have to worry about tectonic or volcanic activity and could burrow down as far as you like.

 

There is just more reason to go to mars, even if you only take the mining colony approach. Think about a colony on mars controlling the drones that move around the asteroid belt and shove tiny asteroids on a trajectory toward mars where they get snagged at the moons mined for the colony on the surface and sell supplies to earth countries.

 

Or tourist visits to the canyons.

 

The thing is we don't have to alter mars to make it possible to put whole nations of people there with current tech levels. But for even a research station to survive Venus we would need some very serious tech advances and to make long term sustainable cities there we would have to completely change the whole planet. Changing complete planets is way more work than we are able to do reliably and quickly now.

 

That's just for starters.


Live content within small means. Seek elegance rather than luxury, Grace over fashion and wealth over riches.
Listen to clouds and mountains, children and sages. Act bravely, think boldly.
Await occasions, never make haste. Find wonder and awe, by experiencing the everyday.

#38
Italian Ufo

Italian Ufo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,190 posts

I believe that Mars and the Moon will be the only habitable planets in our solar system. On all the other planets we will have hotels, organized trips, military bases, industries, projects to find resources but nothing more than that. Maybe on these planets we will implant some back up system for humans who are now computer avatars.

Hopefully we will colonize other planets outside our solar system.



#39
jb93

jb93

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Most likely europa, titan, ganymede and some other moons which will first be explored (by manned missions) around 2080 and first colonized by the early 2100's



#40
Mashallah

Mashallah

    Transgender student

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,332 posts
  • LocationSerbia

 

1. Why?

Look outside your window and tell me if how many floating cities you see.
 

2. Comparable complexity. In one case, you need to get rid of the atmosphere. In the other case, you need to make an atmosphere. In one case, you need to cool the planet down. In the other case, you need to heat the planet up. All in all, the difficulty is around the same.

You are dead wrong. If I need to explain to you, that it's 460'C on Venus, and it was warmer on parts of Mars than in parts of Canada this year, then I just don't see point of this discussion.
You are either ignorant, or just trolling.

So I'm out. Have fun with floating cities and making Venus a habitable place.

 

 

I "like" how you, yet again, ignored almost everything I said. I never said floating "cities". I said that small-scale colonization is possible through floating bases, but that's irrelevant anyway, as only large-scale colonization matters IMO, which more or less requires terraformation on either planet.

 

 

 

1. Well I kinda clarified this in a later post with Raklian so refer to those. It's just easier with Mars since it's a given.
 
2. So what's the plan then? 
 
3. That's going to require a mighty amount of energy.
 
4. I know wind exists Lol. Extreme heating and extreme cooling on each side of the planet will cause a really sharp gradient resulting in really extreme storms and wind belts. As for the reflecting light, sure but refer to number 3. Alas though too remember that Venus's atmosphere alone already reflects a whopping 70% of solar radiation and thanks to the atmospheric setup it's more efficient at trapping heat. Its surface is hot and would absorb a good chunk of that alone without so much cloud cover as well as near-constant heating. With one side constantly facing the sun and the additional solar radiation, you still end up with an increasingly hot environment. 
 
5. That's no where near the baggage of Venus. Atmospheric density isn't exactly as much of a problem on Mars as it is with Venus's in terms of terraforming. Mars ~0.020 kg/m3, Earth ~1.2 km/m3, Venus ~67 kg/m3. Very sharp difference with Venus due to the shear amount of gas that'd have to be removed. Doesn't matter how you put it; Mars is still more Earth-like relative to Venus because of that smaller difference. As for radiation yes this a problem in both places and even in interplanetary flight. That's been under research for quite a bit now. As for gravity, that's also something that has to be considered but keep in mind we understand the effects of microgravity but we don't really have information on the effects of Martian gravity.

 

1. And Mars has lower gravity, which is significantly harder to solve than sleeping indoors. Your point?

2. Either clean up spots for bases, or just make GM organisms that will deal with the acid.

3. I gave an example of a simple way to do it earlier: just spray highly reflective aerosols in the atmosphere, that should reflect a large portion of the light. Yes, that's not the most effective way to do it (using solar panels or mirrors would be significantly more convenient), but it's most likely the simplest.

4. Actually the storms would be slower than now as the bright side would receive less energy while the dark side would receive just as much energy. So what if it reflects 70%? It would still be cooler if it reflected, say, 90%. Besides, it doesn't reflect 70% in all of the spectrum, only in some parts of it.

5. 1.2/0.02=60; 67/1.2=55.83(3); I fail to see how that's not a problem. Besides, in the case of Venus, you need to remove gas, while in the case of Mars you need to add gas. I might be wrong, but the latter seems inherently harder to me. And it's not more Earth-like, because surface gravity is still a very significant parameter.

 

 

1. Hey, I love the idea of floating venusian cities as much as the next guy. But I need you to show me either one city sized air tight floating habitat that can stand the wind speeds and acidic environment as well as several hundred degree temperatures for years on end, or mutiple small versions that could cluster like cities.

 

Mars is easier by lightyears:

 

2. We can build structures that hold atmosphere in against vacuum and insulate against cold. (which is another thing, you don't actually think you can just run an air conditioner on venus do you? we can insulate and run a heater on mars)

 

3. The wind speed can cause dust storms on mars so fierce they might turn the pages of a book, winds on venus would shred you space suits in minutes with heat and acid and volcanic ash (which is a micro abrassive).

 

4. Light levels and rotational day length on mars make solar and communications easier.

 

5. take off an landing on the planet are far easier on mars.

 

6. You can freeze tanks of water on the surface of mars for storage and use.

 

7. Water is actually destroyed on venus. You can mine water from mars and asteroids.

 

8. Mars has two way stations to use in setting up asteroid mining sites and communications relays venus has no moons.

 

9. Mars has lower gravity which makes coming and going easier and possibly setting up a space elevator easier than even earth.

 

10. Venus has a crust so thin over it's molten core that it's like ice over a deep lake, mars you don't have to worry about tectonic or volcanic activity and could burrow down as far as you like.

 

11. There is just more reason to go to mars, even if you only take the mining colony approach. Think about a colony on mars controlling the drones that move around the asteroid belt and shove tiny asteroids on a trajectory toward mars where they get snagged at the moons mined for the colony on the surface and sell supplies to earth countries.

 

12. Or tourist visits to the canyons.

 

13. The thing is we don't have to alter mars to make it possible to put whole nations of people there with current tech levels. But for even a research station to survive Venus we would need some very serious tech advances and to make long term sustainable cities there we would have to completely change the whole planet. Changing complete planets is way more work than we are able to do reliably and quickly now.

 

That's just for starters.

 

1. I never said floating cities. I mainly implied that small-scale floating bases can be viable if you really want small-scale colonization. Besides, it seems like you misunderstand how the atmosphere of Venus works. At the altitude of 49.5 km, you get Earth sea-level atmospheric pressure. At the altitude of 52.5 to 54 km you get temperatures of about 290K to about 310K, which are relatively comfortable for humans. It's also not even too acidic at that height. The only problem for floating colonies is basically the wind, not the wind+high temperatures+acidic environment.

2. Without terraformation, build floating bases and send some robots to drill/whatever. After terraformation, that's not a problem.

3. Cooling down Venus would significantly weaken the winds.

4. I fail to see how. Besides, Venus is closer to the sun, so Solar is inherently better there.

5. So? If you want a large spaceport, colonize the damn Moon. It's the perfect spaceport.

6. And you can extract a lot of stuff from the atmosphere of Venus if you're in a floating base. Besides, it seems like you missed the notion that I proposed terraformation of either planet.

7. Not really, there's water vapor in the atmosphere and that's a known scientific fact.

8. You can always have this thing called artificial satellites for communication. You know, like the thousands we have around Earth.

9. It also poses health risks for long-term habitation. Low gravity is far better for low-population space ports used for transit, a role that Moon would perfectly fill.

10. So?..

11. Why not send them directly towards Earth?
12. I think tourists would also like to visit Venus.

13. You CAN'T put a lot of people on Mars without terraformation. You'd basically give them all more or less a death sentence.


I don't like being lied to, but I'm also tired of The Truth.

Man cannot remake himself without suffering, for he is both the marble and the sculptor.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users