New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: This forum is accepting new registrations by emailing newmarsmember * gmail.com become a registered member. Read the Recruiting expertise for NewMars Forum topic in Meta New Mars for other information for this process.

#1 Re: Terraformation » Mars Terraformed » 2007-02-20 08:41:12

Ittiz,

It looks cool.

Since Mars would have a different light content and different atmospheric thickness, wouldn't the glow be a pinkish blue instead of an earthlike blue?

Even with a near perfect match to earths atmosphere it should look different.?

Nah, the only thing that makes Mars' atmosphere red today is dust.  The red sky was a surprise when the viking landers went to Mars.  Once water settles the dust the atmosphere should be much like Earth's.  Also I don't think the atmosphere is so thick that the blue light is absorbed rather than scattered.

#2 Re: Terraformation » Mars Terraformed » 2006-12-07 21:51:43

Yeah the extra haze is from the deeper atmosphere.  You have to remember that Mars is 1/3rd the size of Earth and its atmosphere is three times higher.  So the atmosphere looks a lot deeper.

If you look close there are shadows.  Although I don't think their realism is good when it comes to which direction the shadows are cast in.  If you look at this I made of the moon terraformed I used a better technique for shadows it's still not perfect.

#3 Re: Terraformation » Terraforming the Moon - Your opinion, please » 2006-10-26 23:25:12

Keeping it properly mixed would require constant intervention. So much better to have a passive barrier such as a roof. What happens if you mix heavy and light gasses. The light gasses still rise to the top and escape. The best you can do with heavy gasses on the moon is to create a situation where people don't need to wear space suits, but still require gas masks to breath as the oxygen is always going to rise to the top and escape.

I discussed How the mixing would be done earlier on.  here are some excerpts:

After putting some thought into it I have figured out that a lifting gas that is lighter than oxygen would be required for the microbes to “hold the O2 down”. The microbes have to be able to “beat” the oxygen back into the upper atmosphere for it to work. This could be done by microbes splitting H2O into H2 (probably binding the O to some thing else) and then using the H2 to beat the free O2 to the upper atmosphere where it then reacts with the H2 and free O2 to make water and sink back down in the atmosphere.

and:

I was thinking about the system used to hold O2 down. Another thing that could be done besides using Hydrogen to get the microbes into the upper atmosphere is just having them live there naturally using photosynthesis. I figure this way the microbes could also scavenge H2O and CO2 and use them for fuel. The only problem with that is that photosynthesis splits the Oxygen out of water making O2. But if the microbe just reacted the O2 with a sugar or a lipid this would fix the problem. After a certain period of growth the microbe would divide asymmetrically (aka bud) the smaller bud would stay in the upper atmosphere as the parent collected more O2, CO2 and water gaining mass. Eventually it would sink in the atmosphere after budding several times until it reached the ground releasing it’s water and gases.

For low gravity worlds a solid roof may not be quite necessary ( solid roof = possibly, the entire astronomical body engulfed into a geodesic sphere ... ) ... it is enough to provide very steep temperature gradient at the tropopause - "high wall cold trap" ... This will make the upper atmosphere too thin, decreasing the amount of atoms which reach escape velocity...

Imagine zillions of aerostats flying in the low stratosphere. Each of the baloons is: solar powered refrigerator with radiator... The strato-fridges sucks in air at the normal for such earth_like hights temperatures of 200-220 K, and releases it cooled down with 50 to 100 K. The excess heat is by-force ( say Peltier-Zeebek effect used ) radiated as IR either upwards ( day-time ), or downwards ( night-time )... It could be IRaser pointing the beams exactly where necessary for precise weather control with very "high resolution" in time, area and volume.

The strato-fridges - colourchanging for manipulation of the albedo - solar influx.

Cause the temperature of one world is nothing more than function of the heat retention rate of it == the ratio/balance between the infaling / absorbed energy and its emisivity in IR

Very often we visualise under term roof kinda greenhouse nylon or metal or glass carpet, or envision passive structure , but when I say strao-fridge-baloons I mean more kinda spores of kinda plants, which collect hydrogen in a bag and possess different types of organs / organoids to do fridging, pointing of IR, reflecting, COMMUNICATING between eachother AND with the parent plants in order to provide activelly, USING the eventual excess of solar EM radiation, control over the atmosphere retention , insolation, weather and climate of the respected world...

Such systems are nothing more super-natural than the earth`s Gaia system, or more super-natural than the warm-bloodedness of the mammals.

Such life-like systems, either self-replicating or not are the key to put control onto the exponential processes.

It is quite easy to calculate how much kelvins should be the gases in the terraformed-moon`s exobase and tropopause in order it to be kept for as long as the sun shines.

Hmm such a system might be possible and could utilize the SF6 since it's a refrigerant, but how to put a system together isn't conceivable with today's knowledge of biology or for awhile probably.  The microbial system I described is conceivable today and microbes are much more resilient in hostile environments like upper atmospheres.

Finally I'll cut and paste a post from my blog about the subject, interesting stuff!   big_smile

I found a power point presentation which is on topic to this discussion by Nick Hoekzema (a NASA scientist): atmostalk.pdf

Note to the anally inclined: The following paragraphs are speculation.

First off Hoekzema calculated that for most worlds thermal escape, which is what I assumed caused the greatest amount atmospheric loss, actually might not be that important. Hoekzema calculated that worlds with escape velocities as small as 0.8km/s could possibly hold a CO2 atmosphere for billions of years if thermal escape were the only mechanism working.

Using Hoekzema’s equations I calculated that the Moon could possibly hold at atmosphere of SF6 for longer than the age of the solar system and also possibly SF6/O2 atmosphere for longer than the age of the solar system. Also apparently the weight and thickness of the SF6 atmosphere would help defeat the two major causes of O2 loss: Hydrodynamic outflow (simplistically an updraft), and sputtering (fast moving molecules hitting slower molecules causing a cascade of atoms leaving the planet/moon). Both effects rely on the average velocities of the molecules in a gas so the SF6 “shields” the O2 from the effects. To visualize what’s occurring imagine a pool table with pool balls. Except some balls are light and small and some are big an heavy. Now if you shoot one of the small balls across a table with mostly large balls rather than light balls fewer balls will go in the sockets because when the small ball hits a large ball the small ball will slow down a lot and the large ball will barely speed up at all. This is the effect that reduces sputtering and hydrodynamic outflow. Although it’s hard to doubt that some mechanism would still be required to hold the O2 down, but it may not have to be super aggressive. Even without SF6 an O2 atmosphere could possibly stay on the moon for 100 million years according to Hoekzema’s calculations. Even if his calculations are highly optamistic the moon could still possibly hold an SF6/O2 atmosphere for 100’s of millions of years, even longer with a mechanism to slow the escape of gases in place.

#4 Re: Terraformation » Terraforming the Moon - Your opinion, please » 2006-10-18 12:45:16

Hello Ittiz,

The moon and other small objects are hard worlds to terrafrom due to their low gravity or high temps.
Titan a large moon has a thick atmosphere due it being very cold. The Moon could have a thick atmosphere if its exosphere was kept cold, the lower troposhere could be warm. Air is a poor conductor of heat, the key is to keep the heat trap near the surface and prevent warming of the outer atmosphere br long wave IR. On earth the outer atmosphere is cold because the greenhouse gases trap the L ir and prevent it from warming it.
The easy way is to build a world house, the entire would is domed with a protective membrane. The worldhouse idea provides a way to keep the gases from escaping the world and you dont need heavey gases niether. The scifi website Orions arm has some good articals on it, but nobody has realey study this concept. Also they have a lot of other spaced based buildings, terraforming, and stories. But it is Scifi just like the ships in star trek or battlestar galitica so don't read to much into their ideas.

I am aware of all this.  My ideas are not inspired by SciFi.  My goal when it comes to developing ideas for terraforming is to come up with schemes that don't require constant human intervention to function.

You wouldn't need to cool the outer atmosphere you would only need to keep it properly mixed, which could be done by a self sustaining biological system. Large scale world houses are out because membranes would get hit by meteorites which would break them.  Also it needs to be constantly maintained.  My ideas only require a space based industry to get them started, and not more advanced technology than that would already required for the industry to exist.

#5 Re: Space Policy » US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions » 2006-10-05 17:22:22

So says Gallup in this online video

People in the US are pretty ignorant about space travel these days.  I think they need something to wake them up like sputnik did  almost 50 years ago.  Something like China landing a man on the moon before we go back.  That would probably kick the American public back into shape about space.

#6 Re: Terraformation » Mars Terraformed » 2006-10-01 22:49:00

I'd like people to take a look at this one and give me some feed back.  It's my attempt at making a "terraformed Mars" as realistic as possible.  It's really huge (almost 7mb) so it may take awhile to load.  For those who have less bandwidth or are just impatient there are two scaled down images too.

100% (6.9mb): TerraformedMarsGlobeRealistic.jpg

50% (2.1mb): TerraformedMarsGlobeRealisticMD.jpg

25% (620kb): TerraformedMarsGlobeRealisticSM.jpg

#7 Re: Terraformation » Mars Topo Dataset » 2006-09-24 16:50:03

That's a neat map, but how come its all jagged around the edges? What do you expect the climate to be like with a 1 bar atmosphere?

Like Rxke said those are polar caps.
as for the weather:
Slightly more extreme temp variations than Earth due to the larger inclination.  Less intense weather patterns due to the smaller ocean and less solar energy.  Also generally cooler but that depends on a few factors like % of CO2 ect.

#8 Re: Terraformation » Mars Topo Dataset » 2006-09-20 18:38:38

Good free Etopo for Earth is available, referenced to sea levels
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/global/relief/ETOPO2/

Mars apparently went from spherical to ellipsoid model and DEM is off-line
http://www.rivertools.com/MOLA.htm

Anyone into mapping Mars ?

How to predict expected ocean levels after a few Kuiper objects are added ?
If length of Martian day is altered ?

here's a link to a map of Mars terraformed that I made.  It's based on real data.  I know many people think that the top of Olympus Mons wouldn't have snow because it's too high but according to my calculations that is not so because the martian atmosphere would be much higher (assuming 1 bar surface pressure). Another note is that the image is copy write 2006 so please don't go using it without my permission. Another note is that it's really HUGE!

#9 Re: Terraformation » Thoughts on producing an atmosphere on the Moon » 2006-09-20 17:03:41

Ittiz , BEAUTIFULL pics!!!!!!
But
1. SF6 + moisture + atmospheric electricity = phosgen...
2. chemical gravitational differentiation - such world would lose water pretty quick
3. from where to get all these exa-tonnes of F?

I address the first and third issues in the Lunar terraforming thread.  I'm not sure what you mean with the second one though.  Please elaborate.

#10 Re: Terraformation » Terraforming the Moon - Your opinion, please » 2006-09-20 10:19:24

If you want to see more of my art click on the links in my sig.  People seem to think the self replicating machines I'm talking about are nano tech, they arn't.  None of them would probably be any smaller than a cat.  Some of them would probably be huge.  Especially the ones for carrying stuff from the asteroid belt.  A large self replicating machine is probably some thing doable with today's technology.
If the surface soil's crystals needed to be broken down that could also be done with machines.  If an SF6 atmosphere is established early in the process machines could suck up the lunar soil for processing.  The heavy gas would actually make this process easier.  I'm not a soil  scientist or geologist so I don't know the exact ways the lunar soil would need to be treated to make it livable.  But if micro and macro organisms made the soil the way it is today a machine could probably be designed to make that process much faster.  Also keep in mind that that surface area of the moon is only 7.4% that of earth so that makes any process requiring mechanical manipulation of the soil and atmosphere a lot faster than you would think at first glance.

About the N2 and CO2.  The CO2 wouldn't be a problem but the N2 would just escape into space because no system (to my knowledge) would be able to be designed to keep it in using practical technology. That is why nitrates would have to be brought to the moon.  After putting some thought into it I have figured out that a lifting gas that is lighter than oxygen would be required for the microbes to "hold the O2 down".  The microbes have to be able to "beat" the oxygen back into the upper atmosphere for it to work.  This could be done by microbes splitting H2O into H2 (probably binding the O to some thing else) and then using the H2 to beat the free O2 to the upper atmosphere where it then reacts  with the H2 and free O2 to make water and sink back down in the atmosphere.  The only problem with this idea if those microbes could be a serious explosion hazard unless some mechinism inside the microbe could be devised to elminate the risk.  Any thoughts?

#11 Re: Terraformation » Terraforming the Moon - Your opinion, please » 2006-08-25 14:18:32

Most people seem to think this probably wouldn't be possible, but I have come up with a scheme that may work.  It would probably be more difficult than terraforming Mars but not as hard as terraforming Venus.

Firstly self replicating machines are a must.  It's the only way to build the infrastructure for any terraforming project that you don't want to take 10,000 years.  If you know anything about microbiology you know that self replicating systems can grow extremely fast.  An example would be E-coli: Starting with one cell and dividing with unlimited resources once every half hour the mass of the e-coli bacterial colony would be greater than that of the earth after only two days.  The reason why this doesn't occur of course is because the cells run out of resources.

The gas SF6 would be used to set up a stable atmosphere on the moon.  SF6 has a molecular weight of about 144 which is even heavier than Xenon gas.  Since the gas is inert humans can breath it.  Specially engineered microbes would be needed to recycle the F2, SF4, and S2F10 byproducts that would form due to lightning and solar radiation.  Or conversely replicating machines could also be used to do that.

Oxygen would also be in the atmosphere of course.  To keep it from escaping  microbes would be engineered to collect oxygen and store it in a vacuole.  Since pure oxygen would be a lifting gas the more oxygen they stored the higher they would float in the atmosphere.  Once they got past most of the atmosphere a UV dependant enzymes would start to make water out of the oxygen through lipolyses and the CTA cycle.  Once the weight of the water got to be to much the microbes would sink in the atmosphere where they would end their life cycle releasing the water and the remaining oxygen.  On the ground the water would be turned back to oxygen using normal photosynthesis.  Since SF6 blocks UV light the microbes would only start absorbing the most amount of oxygen and turning it into water once they are in the upper atmosphere due to the UV dependant enzymes.  So essentially they would carry oxygen from the upper atmosphere to the ground.

So this is how the moon would be terraformed.  Self replicating machines would be seeded in the asteroid belt.  There would be several types for the numerous jobs that would be required.  They would be programmed to replicate until their numbers were sufficient to begin the terraforming process. Once they reached the sufficient number they would start collecting water, fluorine containing ores and sulfur.  They would make hydrogen and oxygen with some of the water for fuel and some of the oxygen would be for atmosphere on the moon. They would purify the fluorine and sulfur and react them together to make SF6.  They would also start collecting ammonia and other organic compounds since nitogen would not be part of the lunar atmosphere.  The SF6 would be released on the surface of the moon.  Once the atmosphere was thick enough the organic compounds would be deposited evenly on the surface.  Then the water would be deposited till water covered about 50% of the lunar surface.   At this point the moon would have about the same land area as South America.  The oxygen along with the engineered microbes would be released onto the moon.  After the microbes had established themselves Earth life would be added completing the process.

On a side note here is some of my lunar terraforming art:  big_smile

Near side:
TerraformedMoonFromEarthSmall.jpg

Farside:
TerraformedMoonFarSideGlobeSmall.jpg

#12 Re: Terraformation » Thoughts on producing an atmosphere on the Moon » 2006-08-25 12:20:54

I've put a lot of consideration into this subject.  I have concluded that SF6, which is an inert gas, would be the best gas to use to put an atmosphere on the moon.  It's extremely heavy and the moon can keep the gas for an indefinite time.  It's the best insulating gas known to man so it wouldn't need to be a full bar of pressure at the surface to make perfectly comfortable conditions.  Also since it's inert humans can breath it without ill side effects.  I will elaborate more on this in the Lunar Terraforming thread.

#13 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Communism - Just like Star Trek » 2006-08-24 22:25:57

It doesn't matter which way you cut that block of cheese communism still stinks.  I don't care if you carve it into a statue of Michelangelo, it will still stink.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB