Venus

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-04-29 10:02:09

The sulfur probably came from volcanic emissions anyway. The Sulfur would go back to where it came from.

SpaceNut · 2014-04-29 18:54:01

There is no techtonic plate action to bring it back toward a magma plume to allow for a continual eruption recycling of it. There is also no magnetic field as well due to the planets core not being liquid and spinning for if it was it would be in a lot better chance to protect its surface.

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-04-29 18:56:35

SpaceNut wrote:

There is no techtonic plate action to bring it back toward a magma plume to allow for a continual eruption recycling of it. There is also no magnetic field as well due to the planets core not being liquid and spinning for if it was it would be in a lot better chance to protect its surface.

Maybe then it would be better to put the sun shade in space so it can intercept the Solar Wind, a physical object will do the trick just as well as a magnetic field.

Void · 2014-05-01 14:08:43

Not wishing to disturb other thought efforts here but I have a question. Can Sulfuric Acid be a Oxidizer for a rocket?

I found just this, implying that to a degree it can be:

http://www.google.com/patents/US2489051

I am not sure what application could be used on Venus, or in floating cities, but it is of interest to me.
Drop Metals from the Moon or asteroids to the cities, and then they make fuels from that, and also use Sulfuric Acid as an Oxidizer?

Or is there a flaw in that thinking?

Last edited by Void (2014-05-01 14:10:48)

RobertDyck · 2014-05-01 14:28:57

In 1975 a German company worked on a rocket design using kerosene and a 50:50 mixture of nitric acid with N2O4. Orbital currently uses MON-3, which is Mixed Oxides of Nitrogen, 3%. That is 3% NO2, remainder N2O4. It's less expensive to make than pure N2O4. But nitric acid is HNO3. Nitrogen itself is an oxidiser, so pretty much any nitrogen oxide compound will work. Suphuric acid should work, just not as strong and heavier. There are mixtures of nitric acid, N2O4, and sulphuric acid. The sulphuric acid acts as a stabilizer.

More on Astronautix:
http://www.astronautix.com/props/nitosene.htm

Void · 2014-05-01 17:48:27

Thank You for the help.

I have to admit I am not in love with the notion of living in a acid atmosphere in floating cities, but perhaps if robotics gets very advanced and suitable materials were found, humans could live in orbit, and robotic spacecraft could travel from orbit to floating cities inhabited by servicing robots.

Perhaps, even the surface could be accessed for mining by robots. I have speculated on an air vehicle powered by CO2 Steam. Fill it with Solid CO2 in the city, and let it drop
down, and the CO2 Liquify (Or maybe with Nitrogen instead). Pick up a payload, and lift back up to the city with "Steam" power.

However, all of this would be an entirely new body of technology, as what we have now would degrade severly and quickly in the Venus environment.

And I do not intend this to be in conflict with the Bio-Terraform plan. They can co-habit I think. In fact the plan I suggest might allow monitoring what's going on, and even perhaps allow dumping nutrients into the atmosphere.

Last edited by Void (2014-05-01 17:50:34)

RobertDyck · 2014-05-01 19:46:55

Propulsion on Venus, I'm thinking of nuclear jet. Based on Project Pluto, but using Americium 242m instead of Plutonium. I don't think you have to worry about short lived fission fragments in exhaust on Venus. The atmosphere is certainly thick enough. Reactor operating temperature of 2,500°F means it should work on Venus. Modern materials could increase that a little. Thermal blankets may sound silly on Venus, but the white thermal blankets used on the Shuttle, known as AFRSI, were a quilt of highly pure silica fibre cloth on the outside, and just normal fibreglass cloth on the metal side. Batting was more highly pure silica fibre. That's glass, definately able to withstand acid. Black tiles were highly pure silica foam, with a glass based black glaze. Because atmosphere can seep through cloth, perhaps apply a glaze of Nonex or non-expanding glass on the metal skin. For the electronics box, you would probably need active refrigeration. The radiator would have to be made of titanium alloy so it could be hotter than Venus ambient. Would titanium alloy grade 7 resist carbonyl sulphide at 462°C? Or would the radiator have to be glazed as well? Remember the glaze on black tiles of the Shuttle (HRSI) were able to handle up to 1260°C, and designed to reject heat (cool) extremely quickly.

karov · 2014-05-03 01:11:43

grab one of these, move it to venus, cool it off, download it, react as much H as needed to get carbon and water, export as much carbon as it is excessive, use the exported C for heat exchanger fluid to cool down the crust, too ( build rotating space habitats of nanotubes - up to 6000 km wide ) ... TERRAFORMATION in ONE GO!

Void · 2014-05-03 16:03:53

okay how about a solar ring of Paladium. in association with the orbit of Venus. Where the paladium absorbs hydrogen, and then crashes into Venus. Paladium from asteroids?

Last edited by Void (2014-05-03 16:04:33)

JoshNH4H · 2014-05-03 16:18:08

That's a huge amount of palladium...

Void · 2014-05-03 20:44:08

Well you have me there, but maybe a substitute composed of less precious materials can be derived.

SpaceNut · 2014-05-03 20:56:42

I am wondering if we super heat the interior of the planet to make it liquid and cause the crust to fracture so as to cause tectonic movement that the planet might start to regenerate a magnetic field and have weather from the atmospheric change. With that continue to seed venus with minerals to get its atmospher to be less acrid.

karov · 2014-05-04 01:25:14

SpaceNut wrote:

I am wondering if we super heat the interior of the planet to make it liquid and cause the crust to fracture so as to cause tectonic movement that the planet might start to regenerate a magnetic field and have weather from the atmospheric change. With that continue to seed venus with minerals to get its atmospher to be less acrid.

add water and tectonics are granted.

RobertDyck · 2014-05-04 01:47:55

Venus has a liquid core now. Venus recycles its surface. The issue is lack of a large moon to create tides. No tides mean nothing to coordinate convection cells. The cells will counter-rotate, so where two cells touch the core material either rises or falls together. Earth has convection cells that tend to rotate generally in the same direction, acting as a bearing between the inner core and mantle. That's because the crust is slowed by tidal action from the Moon's gravity. The mantle is plastic, but not liquid, physically connected to the crust. And tides act on the upper mantle as well. The liquid outer core is a liquid bearing. As the crust and mantle slow, the inner core doesn't. Result is the Earth's inner core is rotating faster than the rest of the planet. The liquid outer core is a fluid bearing between them. So convection cells tend to rotate together, like balls in a ball bearing. Those coordinated convection cells cause a dynamo, which creates our strong magnetic field. Without that, no magnetic field.

As for plate tectonics, Venus is hot now. If you cool the crust, that will create a temperature differential between the core vs crust. That will increase the rate of convection in the mantle. Increased convection means increased plate tectonics. So karov is right: add water and tectonics are granted.

As for atmosphere acidity, the answer is rain. When clouds rain, they will transport acid to the surface. That will react with rocks. So the method to reduce acidity is just cool the planet.

RobertDyck · 2014-05-04 01:48:58

karov wrote:

grab one of these, move it to venus, cool it off, download it, react as much H as needed to get carbon and water, export as much carbon as it is excessive, use the exported C for heat exchanger fluid to cool down the crust, too ( build rotating space habitats of nanotubes - up to 6000 km wide ) ... TERRAFORMATION in ONE GO!

Ok. How do we grab an entire coronal mass ejection, and react it with the atmosphere of Venus?

karov · 2014-05-04 08:19:42

RobertDyck wrote:

karov wrote:
grab one of these, move it to venus, cool it off, download it, react as much H as needed to get carbon and water, export as much carbon as it is excessive, use the exported C for heat exchanger fluid to cool down the crust, too ( build rotating space habitats of nanotubes - up to 6000 km wide ) ... TERRAFORMATION in ONE GO!
Ok. How do we grab an entire coronal mass ejection, and react it with the atmosphere of Venus?

Easy like sunday morning - electromagnetically.

These filaments are like fountains following the magnetic field lines. Just extend the mag field line to Venus ( similarly to Jupiter-Io flux tube ).
Hardware? - the plasma of these filaments itself.
Once the mass brought around Venus use magnetic and or laser cooling to pull down the hydrogen to cryonic temperatures and let it rain down on Venus.

SpaceNut · 2014-05-04 19:57:24

From what I read from this http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_don't_the_planets_Mercury_and_Venus_have_moons is that venus if it had plenty of water would have a difficult time having tidal forces as the possibility for venus to have a moon is nill...this is due to the retrograde spin and proximity to the sun....

For teraforming the atmosphere here is the table to the picture of the content of acid.

Height (km) Temp.(°C) Atmospheric pressure(x Earth)
0 462 92.10
5 424 66.65
10 385 47.39
15 348 33.04
20 306 22.52
25 264 14.93
30 222 9.851
35 180 5.917
40 143 3.501
45 110 1.979
50 75 1.066
55 27 0.5314
60 −10 0.2357

Last edited by SpaceNut (2014-05-04 20:14:59)

RobertDyck · 2014-05-04 21:05:06

That's backwards. Earth's large moon was the result of the last major collision. A planet about the size of Mars collided with Earth. Most was absorbed, making Earth larger. Some of the crust of both planets was thrown up, creating a ring. That ring accreted to form the Moon. The collision left the Earth spinning so fast that a day was 8 hours. But the Moon was initially very close, causing extreme tides. Those extreme tides slowed the Earth's rotation. The Moon slowly receded; as it did tides became weaker. Today the Moon is still receding, but extremely slowly. The length of day is continuing to get longer, but very gradually. The point is the process that created the Moon left us with our length of day and axial tilt.

Venus doesn't have a Moon. That means no planet size object collided with it. Accretion by small objects produces slow rotation, and random directly. Because the disk of dust that our solar system form from rotated in one direction, the planets orbit in that same direction. And inner planets will tend to get hit more often from farther from the Sun, so there is a general tendency for planets to rotate in the same direction as their obit. But it's a tendency, not a rule. Venus shows the random nation of accretion. The fact there was no moon forming impact means it doesn't have a fast day.

karov · 2014-05-05 02:26:21

A moon is not necessary at all for habitability.
But Venus CAN have a moon.
It's Hill sphere is 616 000 km.
IF you want so much a moon for Venus, you have one pretty convenient and good one - Mercury.
Move it up in higher orbit, place it in Venusian orbit.
Terraform both - siphoning gases/volatiles from Venus to Mercury.
Mercury could be moved upwards by trapped coronar ejections, so on arrival to carry enough hydrogen for both planets, swapping H for O, N, C...
Mercury is 4.58 times heavier then Luna, hence equal tidal force will need to place it on cubic root of 4.58 times higher orbit which is - 1.66 x 385 000 = 640 000 km semi-major axis which is beyond the Hill sphere of Venus, hence Mercury "mooned" to Venus will give higher tides.
On say 500 000 km semi-major axis orbit Mercury will excert on Venus TWICE higher tidal force then Moon on Earth. Is that enough?

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-05-05 02:52:27

Sometimes Karov sounds like he comes from a Type II civilization.

karov · 2014-05-05 03:20:44

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Sometimes Karov sounds like he comes from a Type II civilization.

Only sometimes?

I see terraforming ( and even high-tech megastructural habitats construction ) as a form of monumental art which shall be excercised only by this infinitesimal minority of our descendants ( those who belong to "cults" of pro-baseline humanity bias ) which have not transcended into "higher orders of implementation". It might ( most probably ) occur that it is cheaper ( virtually NO cost ) to build bespoke universes, then to change or build planets and super-habitats.

SpaceNut · 2014-05-05 20:54:33

I am wondering about trying to fly a plane like vehicle at the 50km altitude indefinitely uswing the atmosphere as the source of insitu fuel. Since this is simular to flying a earths low altitude, what would it take to slow to the speed reuired to stay aloft. Of course this is easily done with the nuclear powered UAV design but how about changing that up to include manned research. This would probably be a one way mission one orbiting as I am not sure how we would get back to orbit without rockets.

Terraformer · 2014-05-06 05:04:54

No need to use fuel, not when a solar powered propeller plane can stay aloft, as in the Landis proposal.

But the atmosphere is CO2, so as long as you bring hydrogen, you can fill up your rocket with MethLox. Air launch isn't something unfamiliar, either. It would make a pretty cool sample return mission, I think, giving us a some samples of the clouds to analyse for life.

Tom Kalbfus · 2014-05-06 05:46:00

SpaceNut wrote:

From what I read from this http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_don't_the_planets_Mercury_and_Venus_have_moons is that venus if it had plenty of water would have a difficult time having tidal forces as the possibility for venus to have a moon is nill...this is due to the retrograde spin and proximity to the sun....
For teraforming the atmosphere here is the table to the picture of the content of acid.
Height (km) Temp.(°C) Atmospheric pressure(x Earth)
0 462 92.10
5 424 66.65
10 385 47.39
15 348 33.04
20 306 22.52
25 264 14.93
30 222 9.851
35 180 5.917
40 143 3.501
45 110 1.979
50 75 1.066
55 27 0.5314
60 −10 0.2357

I think between 55 and 60 km would be best, 27 degrees centigrade is a bit too warm, what you really want is 15 degrees centigrade for room temperature. Air pressure would be around 0.4 bar I think, If you breath an atmosphere mixture that is half oxygen and half nitrogen, this shouldn't be too bad.

RobertDyck · 2014-05-06 07:38:20

karov wrote:

A moon is not necessary at all for habitability.
But Venus CAN have a moon.

I didn't say I want to give Venus a moon. I responded too...

SpaceNut wrote:

the possibility for venus to have a moon is nill...this is due to the retrograde spin and proximity to the sun....

This claimed retrograde sping prevents any moon. That's not true. Planetary spin has no effect on gravitational capture. The only gravitational effect of planetary spin is "frame dragging", an effect of general relativity. And that is so weak that it wouldn't affect planetary capture at all. What I said is planetary spin is caused by accreation events, not the other way around.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#176 2014-04-29 10:02:09

Re: Venus

#177 2014-04-29 18:54:01

Re: Venus

#178 2014-04-29 18:56:35

Re: Venus

#179 2014-05-01 14:08:43

Re: Venus

#180 2014-05-01 14:28:57

Re: Venus

#181 2014-05-01 17:48:27

Re: Venus

#182 2014-05-01 19:46:55

Re: Venus

#183 2014-05-03 01:11:43

Re: Venus

#184 2014-05-03 16:03:53

Re: Venus

#185 2014-05-03 16:18:08

Re: Venus

#186 2014-05-03 20:44:08

Re: Venus

#187 2014-05-03 20:56:42

Re: Venus

#188 2014-05-04 01:25:14

Re: Venus

#189 2014-05-04 01:47:55

Re: Venus

#190 2014-05-04 01:48:58

Re: Venus

#191 2014-05-04 08:19:42

Re: Venus

#192 2014-05-04 19:57:24

Re: Venus

#193 2014-05-04 21:05:06

Re: Venus

#194 2014-05-05 02:26:21

Re: Venus

#195 2014-05-05 02:52:27

Re: Venus

#196 2014-05-05 03:20:44

Re: Venus

#197 2014-05-05 20:54:33

Re: Venus

#198 2014-05-06 05:04:54

Re: Venus

#199 2014-05-06 05:46:00

Re: Venus

#200 2014-05-06 07:38:20

Re: Venus

Board footer