Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

Calliban · 2022-09-20 11:26:09

Void wrote:

But I guess geothermal for Mars is a thing that may become real. We don't know yet.
But someone better than me seemed to think so:
“The first human bases on Mars could carry a 100 kilowatt nuclear reactor,” said Zubrin. “But to have a Mars settlement, you’re going to want 10 megawatts and for that kind of power, you need to develop Mars’ geothermal potential.”
Done.

That has a strong bearing on where we will choose to build a base on Mars. We want a location as close as possible to the most recent volcanic activity on the planet. That is where geothermal gradient will be steepest. We want to avoid having to drill several kilometres into the planet if possible. This place looks like the best location to establish the first permanent settlement.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerberus_Fossae

There is even possibility of liquid ground water here. If aquifers can be tapped, water would be available at much lower energy cost than having to mine and melt solid permafrost.

Last edited by Calliban (2022-09-20 11:32:44)

Void · 2022-09-20 14:37:31

The response to this query is very interesting:
Query: "Solar Wind and Phobos"
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Solar+Win … 67&pc=U531
Quote:

RESOURCES
Electric Charging on Martian Moon Phobos
Source: NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center Conceptual Image Lab
Published: October 30, 2018
The interaction of the solar wind with the Martian moon Phobos creates a complex electrical environment that could impact future exploration.
For more information and download options, visit NASA's Conceptual Image Lab.
Transcript
Mars has two moons, Phobos and Deimos. Both are small, airless bodies with irregular shapes.
To better understand these moons, scientists at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center simulated the solar wind environment at Phobos.
Phobos orbits incredibly close to Mars, only thirty-seven hundred miles above the surface. In fact, it whips around the planet in less than eight hours!
Because it has no atmosphere or magnetosphere, Phobos plows directly into the solar wind for part of its orbit.
The solar wind consists of negatively charged electrons, which are light, and positively charged ions, which are heavy.
Normally they exist in equal numbers, so the solar wind is electrically neutral.
Phobos, however, absorbs the solar wind on its dayside, leaving a void over its night side.
Because the electrons are lighter than the ions, they rush in to fill the void.
This creates a field of negative electric potential over Phobos and statically charges its night side.
The ions are attracted to the field and pulled in farther downstream, restoring the solar wind's density and neutral charge.
The simulation also looked at a massive crater called Stickney.
It showed that when Stickney falls into shadow, electrons initially move into the crater, and the associated electric potential forces the ions to keep up.
On the smaller scale, this electrically charges the crater interior through the same process that charges the larger night side.
Phobos is often cited as a target for future exploration. But roving around on the night side, or within shadowed craters, could build up static electric charge, possibly affecting sensitive equipment.
Mission planners will have to face this challenge as they set their sights on the moons of Mars.

Mars Moons
Page Updated: March 18, 2019

My first interest in this was the positive ions that it seems may travel into Phobos.

But I am also interested in the night side (-) charge and wonder if it can be tapped.

But the possibility that ions can travel through the moon, suggests that they can be slowed down. This then makes me wonder if it would be possible to pull them into an open bottomed dome flush with the surface. Should that dome become (-) charged when on the night, captive charge inside of the dome might pull ions into the dome. And so, I can think of various ways to try to harvest them.

It would not necessarily be only the solar wind through but might also include molecules pulled off from the atmosphere of Mars.

I have something else to do just now, but I have some ideas.

Done for now.

Video reference materials:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=So … &FORM=VIRE
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=So … &FORM=VIRE
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=So … &FORM=VIRE

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=So … M%3DHDRSC3

Looks interesting, wonder if the moons can be tapped as a power supply?

Later....................

Last edited by Void (2022-09-20 14:55:14)

Void · 2022-09-20 20:00:05

Continuing with the previous post, I suspect that the moons of Mars will be impregnated with Hydrogen, Helium, Helium3, CO2, O2, water, Nitrogen, and Argon. I also suspect that they will have had electrical discharges going through them that may have created Hydrocarbons.

But that would have to be looked for.

A possible compatible adaptation of that if it does work like that would be a very large surround, perhaps resembling a Christmas Tree Ornament: https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Ch … HoverTitle

With a screen front, and impermeable rest of the bulb. Solar power devices attached in front of the screen. Allowing the solar wind to penetrate into the bulb.

A bulb of such a type attached to each moon of Mars, with bearings attaching to the spin poles of the moons. This so that the front of the bulb can point at the sun at all times, while each moon is free to keep spinning.

With electrical insulation used as necessary, it may be possible to tap the electron "Cloud?" trailing the object. This to flow to parts of the bulb where the solar wind has been depleted of electrons. The portion opposite to the front of the bulb always being in eternal darkness, and so very cold. Then an opportunity as well to exploit thermal differences between the solar devices on the front and the "Radiator" in the shadow.

The hope would also be to emulate what I think the moons already do, in collecting the solar wind.

But this is in the rough more or less. I am guessing that with diagnosis of reality revisions would be made. But there is no reason the "Bulb" could not be 100 or so times as big as each moon.

And if this works for these moons, it might also be suitable for asteroids in the asteroid belt.

The area inside the "Bulb" could easily accommodate a large amount of artificial gravity machines.

In addition, also possible might be devices to scoop out atmosphere up to the system, using the inertia of Phobos.

During the lowering of the orbit of Phobos, then to convert it into building materials that will not yield as easily to the tidal forces.

The outside and inside of the parts of the bulb in darkness may in fact condense some volatiles into ice, even in vacuum.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-20 20:15:54)

Void · 2022-09-21 09:41:44

So, it is really possible that I have by not overstepped reality. More information is needed. "Ground Truth" is something that might be said.

But a sun pointing swiveling moon surround looks interesting to me as a possible mega-structure that may have a large payout.

Where there is apparently an electron concentration on the leeward side of this object, I would hope that at other portions of the surround there would be a greater exposure to protons, which would give a relative presence of electrical holes.

It is likely that all constructed pressurized devices in the relative vacuum of space will leak atmosphere to the void, over time. But by situating these so that the solar wind passing into the hollow of the surround will also likely carry those leaked gasses into the hollow, then if the far side is maintained at cold temperatures recapture may be possible for some of them.

The leeward side, being in perpetual darkness and facing the cold of the universe could be caused to be very cold in fact. While direct condensation is a thing to consider, also the use of adsorption or sorption machines might also do better at recapture/recycle of these molecules, and also the ones that might spill off of Mars and somehow enter.

I have previously indicated that I am not against Artificial Gravity machines similar to what the great Gerard K. O'Neill and other have proposed, it should be reasonable to update those as well. If these would be leaky, now, a method to recatch some of what is leaked.

And so also a superstructure to attach them to.

I also like the idea of a Stator structure to be the first line of pressurization, and rotors to spin within at various speeds. Agriculture in low gravity and microgravity. Microgravity manufacturing also.

So, if the "Object Surround" has a face that always faces the sun, of course various methods for energy from the sun. And I won't go into details but there are likely many ways to involve the cold of the "Dark Side" where Darth Vader might have preferred to live.

But could Martian atmosphere be sucked into this thing using electric tethers? I guess I say "Maybe".

So, if you can use an electrical tether to dip into the Martian atmosphere, anchored to this device, you may use the electric power of the device to make ions march up it. That will draw the whole apparatus down towards an eventual doom, but we would have millions of years most likely before that is an issue, and as the moon is converted from raw materials to processed materials the whole device will become more tolerant of tidal forces.

Could tethers latch on to objects on the ground? Maybe, some have indicated so. Can they catch objects flung up with mass drivers? Maybe, I am not sure. But to pull atmosphere, would be a very easier trick than those, I think.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrodynamic_tether
Quote:

Electrodynamic tether
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Medium close-up view, captured with a 70 mm camera, shows tethered satellite system deployment.
Electrodynamic tethers (EDTs) are long conducting wires, such as one deployed from a tether satellite, which can operate on electromagnetic principles as generators, by converting their kinetic energy to electrical energy, or as motors, converting electrical energy to kinetic energy.[1] Electric potential is generated across a conductive tether by its motion through a planet's magnetic field.
A number of missions have demonstrated electrodynamic tethers in space, most notably the TSS-1, TSS-1R, and Plasma Motor Generator (PMG) experiments.

I have always been nervous about these things and impactors. But still, I would like to struggle with the problems and hope to secure rewards.

I have had some thoughts about a screen cage of length, which might have several tethers woven into its structure, and where repair robots may be able to continually maintain the integrity of the structure.

So, it is considered to run these as motors or generators. I also am interested in the (+} ions that may be caused to march up them. That might be one way. Also, I mentioned a long screen tether, where a hollow would be inside the screen structure that might descend towards the atmosphere. If you blocked to path of ions on the rotational leeward side, it might be that an increased collection of (+) ions might occur in part because of orbital inertias, and also as there would likely be an electron cloud behind this. This would be quite similar to the moons surround.

In general, I have considered drawing ions up to the surround, and so slowing down Phobos. However, the population of molecules is not the same through the whole transit around the globe of Mars. There would be the tail. So, for some locations in the orbit molecules might be collected and so slow down Phobos, but it may be that for others these could be pushed "Down" and rejected to accelerate Phobos.

I have always wondered how to collect the molecules at the top of the tether. Just now I am thinking that heat would make them jump off of the top of the tether, and so to be swept into the enclosure for Phobos. There to be neutralized and condensed or adsorbed by an adsorption pump(s).

Thos all may conflict with creating a protective magnetic field for Mars. Or in part be in conflict. I guess you have to consider what things can be done and pick and choose. It may be that somehow a method compatible may be created, but I don't see it yet. I would say as the industrial economy would evolve, the need to do things one way may change to the need to do it another way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorption_ … 927%20mbar.
Quote:

Sorption pump
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
The sorption pump is a vacuum pump that creates a vacuum by adsorbing molecules on a very porous material like molecular sieve which is cooled by a cryogen, typically liquid nitrogen. The ultimate pressure is about 10−2 mbar. With special techniques this can be lowered till 10−7 mbar. The main advantages are the absence of oil or other contaminants, low cost and vibration free operation because there are no moving parts. The main disadvantages are that it cannot operate continuously and cannot effectively pump hydrogen, helium and neon, all gases with lower condensation temperature than liquid nitrogen. The main application is as a roughing pump for a sputter-ion pump in ultra-high vacuum experiments, for example in surface physics.

Query: "Molecular flow in a vacuum"
General Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=Molecular … a78dd4d03c
A single response: https://content.leybold.com/en/knowledg … cular-flow
Quote:

What is Molecular Flow?
Molecular flow
Molecular flow prevails in the high and ultrahigh vacuum ranges. In these regimes the molecules can move freely, without any mutual interference. Molecular flow is present where the mean free path length for a particle is very much larger than the diameter of the pipe: λ >> d.

Query: "At what pressure does molecular flow begin?"
General response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=At+what+p … 2aa26c22af
Specific Response: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_mole … 923%20mbar.
Quote:

Free molecular flow
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Free molecular flow describes the fluid dynamics of gas where the mean free path of the molecules is larger than the size of the chamber or of the object under test. For tubes/objects of the size of several cm, this means pressures well below 10−3 mbar. This is also called the regime of high vacuum, or even ultra-high vacuum. This is opposed to viscous flow encountered at higher pressures.[1] The presence of free molecular flow can be calculated, at least in estimation, with the Knudsen number (Kn). If Kn > 10, the system is in free molecular flow,[2] also known as Knudsen flow.[3]
In free molecular flow, the pressure of the remaining gas can be considered as effectively zero. Thus, boiling points do not depend on the residual pressure. The flow can be considered to be individual particles moving in straight lines. Practically, the "vapor" cannot move around bends or into other spaces behind obstacles, as they simply hit the tube wall. This implies conventional pumps cannot be used, as they rely on viscous flow and fluid pressure. Instead, special sorption pumps, ion pumps and momentum transfer pumps i.e. turbomolecular pumps are used.
Free molecular flow occurs in various processes such as molecular distillation, ultra-high vacuum equipment such as particle accelerators, and naturally in outer space.
The definition of a free molecular flow depends on the distance scale under consideration. For example, in the interplanetary medium, the plasma is in a free molecular flow regime in scales less than 1 AU; thus, planets and moons are effectively under particle bombardment. However, on larger scales, fluid-like behavior is observed, because the probability of collisions between particles becomes significant.

So, to some extent the idea of the enclosure includes something like a big paper bag which is left open and the intertie of the solar wind pushes molecules into it. Various methods then might be tried to neutralize the (+) ions and to then condense/adsorb them.

This of course, for Mars may lead to fuels, plastics and Oxidizers, and Nitrogen perhaps.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-21 10:28:45)

Void · 2022-09-21 18:28:00

Some of my posting might have contradictions in it. I do mention a Sun following surround for Phobos, pivoting on the rotational poles of Phobos. And then I mention tethers. Doing both from the same object may be a problem. Not beyond solving, but I think that there are any number of possible solutions to that, not necessarily easy, but space is not easy in general. I will let it rest for now.

Done.

Void · 2022-09-21 18:30:07

My recent posts might suggest that I am in some binary argument to champion the moons of Mars and not Mars itself. Not at all, I think that the moons of Mars may be very important to the development of Mars and the asteroid belt.

But I also think that landings on Mars may very well come first.

So, then to know Mars could be valuable.

This is one idea of the very early nature of Mars with an atmosphere: https://phys.org/news/2022-09-clues-ear … lanet.html Quote:

New clues about early atmosphere on Mars suggest a wet planet capable of supporting life
by SETI Institute

It is hard to tell what their notion of "Early Mars" is. If Mars did not have a Thea collision like Earth is supposed to have had, then perhaps an early ocean(s) strongly promoted by geothermal heat, may have been possible. And indeed, if that came more early before most of the Hydrogen resources floated away, then I can be comfortable with this model of the very early history of water on Mars.

It does suggest an interesting variation on terraforming Mars now. We mostly think of planetary magnetic fields separating the solar wind from a planet's atmosphere as in the case of Earth. But what if we create a lesser magnetic field that allows some or most of the solar wind into the Martian atmosphere on the sunward side, but prohibits it then to leave, and to take with its atmosphere?

Can you then build up Hydrogen in the atmosphere, and compounds, (Greenhouse Gasses), in the atmosphere from that source?

I think I read that Mercury has a leaky magnetic shield, and it does have very large ice sheets in its polar areas, I think I have also read.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury%2 … onomers%29.
Quote:

Field characteristics
The MESSENGER spacraft noted that Mercury's magnetic field is responsible for several magnetic "tornadoes" – twisted bundles of magnetic fields connecting the planetary field to interplanetary space – that are some 800 km wide or a third the total radius of the planet.
Scientists noted that Mercury's magnetic field can be extremely "leaky,"[29][30][31] because MESSENGER encountered magnetic "tornadoes" during its second fly-by on October 6, 2008, which could possibly replenish the atmosphere (or "exosphere", as referred to by astronomers). When Mariner 10 made a fly-by of Mercury back in 1974, its signals measured the bow shock, the entrance and exit from the magnetopause, and that the magnetospheric cavity is ~20 times smaller than Earth's, all of which had presumably decayed during the MESSENGER flyby.[32] Even though the field is just over 1% as strong as Earth's, its detection by Mariner 10 was taken by some scientists as an indication that Mercury's outer core was still liquid, or at least partially liquid with iron and possibly other metals.[33]

So, we might like a somewhat weak magnetic field for Mars that would be like pouring an ingredient, the solar wind, into the atmosphere, but like a bowl to not allow the solar wind and atmosphere to "Spill" out.

So, that is a terraform notion. It might also be somewhat compatible with collecting molecules from the Martian moons as I have previously posted about the hopes of.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-21 18:46:44)

Void · 2022-09-21 19:28:12

Somewhat in support of the just previous post: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/20 … ercury-ice
Quote:

Aug 2, 2019
The Moon and Mercury May Have Thick Ice Deposits
Earth’s Moon and Mercury, the closest planet to the Sun, may contain significantly more water ice than previously thought, according to a new analysis of data from NASA’s LRO and MESSENGER spacecraft.
The potential ice deposits are found in craters near the poles of both worlds.

Quote:

Previous observations of the poles of Mercury with Earth-based radar revealed a signature characteristic of thick, pure ice deposits. Later, MESSENGER – the MErcury Surface, Space ENvironment, GEochemistry and Ranging spacecraft – imaged these ice deposits. “We showed Mercury’s polar deposits to be dominantly composed of water ice and extensively distributed in both Mercury’s north and south polar regions,” said Nancy Chabot, instrument scientist for MESSENGER’s Mercury Dual Imaging System from the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory in Laurel, Maryland. “Mercury’s ice deposits appear to be much less patchy than those on the Moon, and relatively fresh, perhaps emplaced or refreshed within the last tens of millions of years.”

So some water for Mercury may be due to a leaky magnetic field that might allow protons in from the Solar wind, and where the heat of the day and also perhaps small impactors may create water. The water may survive to get to the poles and freeze.

For Mars, perhaps a leaking magnetic field would do similar, but of course, the heat and impactors will be much less. Perhaps U.V. light can make chemistry happen between solar wind Protons, and the atmosphere of Mars.

This also suggests alien worlds, where solar wind combined with CO2, could power a biosphere.

Perhaps this could be common for Red Dwarf worlds where a field is leaky but not absent.

I think that this is the best article of its kind that I have seen so far: https://singularityhub.com/2021/11/19/h … %20burning.
Quote:

How Antarctic Bacteria Live on Air and Use Hydrogen as Fuel to Make Water
Pok Man Leung
By
Pok Man Leung
November 19, 2021
Antarctica hydrogen bacteria iceberg glacier
Humans have only recently begun to think about using hydrogen as a source of energy, but bacteria in Antarctica have been doing it for a billion years.
We studied 451 different kinds of bacteria from frozen soils in East Antarctica and found most of them live by using hydrogen from the air as a fuel. Through genetic analysis, we also found these bacteria diverged from their cousins in other continents approximately a billion years ago.
These incredible microorganisms come from ice-free desert soils north of the Mackay Glacier in East Antarctica. Few higher plants or animals can prosper in this environment, where there is little available water, temperatures are below zero, and the polar winters are pitch-black.
Despite the harsh conditions, microorganisms thrive. Hundreds of bacterial species and millions of cells can be found in a single gram of soil, making for a unique and diverse ecosystem.
How do microbial communities survive in such punishing surroundings?
A Dependable Alternative to Photosynthesis
We discovered more than a quarter of these Antarctic soil bacteria create an enzyme called RuBisCO, which is what lets plants use sunlight to capture carbon dioxide from air and convert it into biomass. This process, photosynthesis, generates most of the organic carbon on Earth.
However, we found more than 99 percent of the RuBisCO-containing bacteria were unable to capture sunlight. Instead, they perform a process called chemosynthesis.
Rather than relying on sunlight to power the conversion of carbon dioxide into biomass, they use inorganic compounds such as the gases hydrogen, methane, and carbon monoxide.
Living on Air
Where do the bacteria find these energy-rich compounds? Believe it or not, the most reliable source is the air!
Air contains high levels of nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide, but also trace amounts of the energy sources hydrogen, methane, and carbon monoxide.
They are only present in air in very low concentrations, but there is so much air it provides a virtually unlimited supply of these molecules for organisms that can use them.
And many can. Around one percent of Antarctic soil bacteria can use methane, and some 30 percent can use carbon monoxide.
More remarkably, our research suggests that 90 percent of Antarctic soil bacteria may scavenge hydrogen from the air.
The bacteria gain energy from hydrogen, methane, and carbon by combining them with oxygen in a chemical process that is like a very slow kind of burning.
Our experiments showed the bacteria consume atmospheric hydrogen even at temperatures of -20°C, and they can consume enough to cover all their energy requirements.
What’s more, the hydrogen can power chemosynthesis, which may provide enough organic carbon to sustain the entire community. Other bacteria can access this carbon by “eating” their hydrogen-powered neighbors or the carbon-rich ooze they produce.
Water From Thin Air
When you burn hydrogen, or when the bacteria harvest energy from it, the only byproduct is water.
Making water is an important bonus for Antarctic bacteria. They live in a hyper-arid desert, where water is unavailable because the surrounding ice is almost permanently frozen and any moisture in the soil is rapidly sucked out by the dry, cold air.
So the ability to generate water from “thin air” may explain how these bacteria have been able to exist in this environment for millions of years. By our calculations, the rates of hydrogen-powered water production are sufficient to rehydrate an entire Antarctic cell within just two weeks.
By adopting a “hydrogen economy,” these bacteria fulfil their needs for energy, biomass, and hydration. Three birds, one stone.
Could a Hydrogen Economy Sustain Extraterrestrial Life?
The minimalist hydrogen-dependent lifestyle of Antarctic soil bacteria redefines our understanding of what is the very least required for life on Earth. It also brings new insights into the search for extraterrestrial life.
Hydrogen is the most common element in the universe, making up almost three-quarters of all matter. It is a major component of the atmosphere on some alien planets, such as HD 189733b, which orbits a star 64.5 light-years from Earth.
If life were to exist on such a planet, where conditions may not be as hospitable as on much of Earth, consuming hydrogen might be the simplest and most dependable survival strategy.
“Follow the water” is the mantra for searches of extraterrestrial life. But given that bacteria can literally make water from air, perhaps the key to finding life beyond Earth is to “follow the hydrogen.”The Conversation
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Image Credit: 12019 / 10259 images/Pixabay

So, imagine worlds where the solar wind, not sunlight, power a biosphere. Such worlds may accumulate excess water over time, however.
The Trappiest planets seem to have a lot of water.

Note that I made the world Methane bold. I expect that the Earth's biosphere does actively suck Methane out of the atmosphere, and that it will redistribute from areas of high concentration to areas of low concentration where it may be being consumed.

So, Methane as a greenhouse gas may not be as dangerous as it might seem.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-21 19:43:12)

Void · 2022-09-22 12:12:32

I linked to this in the previous post, but failed to notice that these life forms are happy at -20 degC. This is very low. Lake Vida in Antarctica has -13 degC I believe. Lake Vida is also challenging for life as it is a very strong brine.

https://singularityhub.com/2021/11/19/h … %20burning

Lake Vida: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Vida
Quote:

The ice at depth is saturated with brine that is seven times as saline as seawater.[1] The high salinity allows the brine to remain liquid at an average yearly water temperature of −13 °C (9 °F).

So, for Mars, unless geothermal heat, or I might speculate electrical current flows, in the regolith, the ability to create liquid water at -13 degC with 7 times the salinity, is not probable in my speculation.

But the life in Antarctica only needs -20 degC, and this is within reach of some places just below the surface, out of the U.V. flux.
These organisms not only get energy from gasses such as Hydrogen or Methane, but can get their water that way.

The vapor pressure of water at -20 degC is well below boiling on most of the surface of Mars, except perhaps the high mountains.

Well, this seems to do the job: http://endmemo.com/chem/vaporpressurewater.php

It indicates a vapor pressure of 1.2230 mbar. This is plenty for most locations on Mars.

I am guessing that these life forms will be able to live happily on Mars.

A good test for life on Mars might involve scooping soil and then offering it various gasses, including Hydrogen I would think.

This also changes the notion of what a Habitable planet may be like. It could look like a cold desert, and yet be fed by a source of Hydrogen or other gasses, a source possibly including the solar wind, if it can get into the atmosphere.

Imagine a planet which might have multicellular vegetation that might use air as it's food. Perhaps Hydrogen from the solar wind. While it might also loose hydrogen to space from water split by solar radiation if the input of Hydrogen was in balance with the losses, it might be possible. In the case though where too much water was created, then it might become ice covered though, but would that still have situations for life?

Water worlds not so much ice covered, could also run this way, I am guessing.

It does seem that all worlds are likely to be terminal. They have a birth, a life, with or without biology, and eventually change to the extent that they may not foster biology, so we might say they then died.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-22 12:37:30)

Void · 2022-09-23 09:11:43

Calliban, I would like to visit this again. I missed it previously while I was doing Martian moons and such.

Quote:

Void wrote:
But I guess geothermal for Mars is a thing that may become real. We don't know yet.
But someone better than me seemed to think so:
“The first human bases on Mars could carry a 100 kilowatt nuclear reactor,” said Zubrin. “But to have a Mars settlement, you’re going to want 10 megawatts and for that kind of power, you need to develop Mars’ geothermal potential.”
Done.
That has a strong bearing on where we will choose to build a base on Mars. We want a location as close as possible to the most recent volcanic activity on the planet. That is where geothermal gradient will be steepest. We want to avoid having to drill several kilometres into the planet if possible. This place looks like the best location to establish the first permanent settlement.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerberus_Fossae
There is even possibility of liquid ground water here. If aquifers can be tapped, water would be available at much lower energy cost than having to mine and melt solid permafrost.
Last edited by Calliban (2022-09-20 12:32:44)

I am going on another fishing trip, however.

I think Nuclear, Geothermal, and Space Solar should all be promoted, but of course, also surface solar and wind as well, where appropriate.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-23 09:13:56)

Void · 2022-09-25 17:36:16

Jumping back to the materials of the post of #508, I have some things to continue with.

With this query: "solar wind mixing with Martian atmosphere", I found this: Many articles say that the solar wind rips the Martian atmosphere, but this one says it does not do it that much: https://www.news18.com/news/tech/mars-a … 99455.html
Quote:

Mars Atmosphere Well Protected From Solar Wind: Study

So, I am not sure.

A further quote from that article:

"Despite the stronger solar wind and EUV-radiation levels under the early Sun, ion escape cannot explain more than 0.006 bar of atmospheric pressure lost over the course of 3.9 billion years," said Ramstad. "Even our upper estimate, 0.01 bar, is an insignificant amount in comparison to the atmosphere required to maintain a sufficiently strong greenhouse effect, about one bar or more according to climate models," he said.

And we have Venus without a magnetic field but with a very dense atmosphere.

And we have the 7 planets of http://www.trappist.one/#:~:text=TRAPPI … in%20orbit.

These appear to have a lot of water on them. If that is true, I don't see how they could not then also have atmospheres of some kind. And yet, that is a Red Dwarf star.

Trappist-1 is apparently likely to flare, and I don't see how that is compatible, with large amounts of water, unless the planets do not shed much atmosphere or water. I guess better measurements will tell the story better.

For Mars however, a term has become known to me "Proton Aurora".

Query: "Proton Aurora for Mars".

General Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=Proton+Au … 3f93327755

A recent response: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/20 … ton-aurora
Quote:

Aug 31, 2022
MAVEN and EMM Make First Observations of Patchy Proton Aurora at Mars
NASA’s MAVEN (Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution) mission and the United Arab Emirates’ Emirates Mars Mission (EMM) have released joint observations of dynamic proton aurora events at Mars. Remote auroral observations by EMM paired with in-situ plasma observations made by MAVEN open new avenues for understanding the Martian atmosphere. This collaboration was made possible by recent data-sharing between the two missions and highlights the value of multi-point observations in space. A study of these findings appears in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.
Image of patchy proton aurora at Mars
Patchy proton aurora on Mars form when turbulent conditions around the planet allow charged hydrogen particles from the Sun to stream into the Martian atmosphere. Images from August 5 show the typical atmospheric conditions, in which the EMM instrument EMUS detects no unusual activity at two wavelengths associated with the hydrogen atom. But on August 11 and August 30, the instrument observed patchy aurora at both wavelengths, indicating turbulent interactions with the solar wind.
Credits: EMM/EMUS
In the new study, EMM discovered fine-scale structures in proton aurora that spanned the full day side of Mars. Proton aurora, discovered by MAVEN in 2018, are a type of Martian aurora that form as the solar wind, made up of charged particles from the Sun, interacts with the upper atmosphere. Typical proton aurora observations made by MAVEN and ESA’s (the European Space Agency) Mars Express mission show these aurora appearing smooth and evenly distributed across the hemisphere. By contrast, EMM observed proton aurora that appeared highly dynamic and variable. These “patchy proton aurora” form when turbulent conditions around Mars allow the charged particles to flood directly into the atmosphere and glow as they slow down.
“EMM’s observations suggested that the aurora was so widespread and disorganized that the plasma environment around Mars must have been truly disturbed, to the point that the solar wind was directly impacting the upper atmosphere wherever we observed auroral emission,” said Mike Chaffin, a MAVEN and EMM scientist based at the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Colorado Boulder and lead author of the study. “By combining EMM auroral observations with MAVEN measurements of the auroral plasma environment, we can confirm this hypothesis and determine that what we were seeing was essentially a map of where the solar wind was raining down onto the planet.”

Normally it is difficult for the solar wind to reach Mars’ upper atmosphere because it is redirected by the bow shock and magnetic fields surrounding the planet. The patchy proton aurora observations are therefore a window into rare circumstances – ones during which the Mars-solar wind interaction is chaotic. “The full impact of these conditions on the Martian atmosphere is unknown, but EMM and MAVEN observations will play a key role in understanding these enigmatic events,” said Chaffin.

The data-sharing between MAVEN and EMM has enabled scientists to determine the drivers behind the patchy proton aurora. EMM carries the Emirates Mars Ultraviolet Spectrograph (EMUS) instrument, which observes the Red Planet’s upper atmosphere and exosphere, scanning for variability in atmospheric composition and atmospheric escape to space. MAVEN carries a full suite of plasma instruments, including the Magnetometer (MAG), the Solar Wind Ion Analyzer (SWIA), and the SupraThermal And Thermal Ion Composition (STATIC) instrument used in this study.
Diagram comparing normal to patchy proton aurora at Mars
Comparison of normal and patchy proton aurora formation mechanisms at Mars. Top image shows the normal proton aurora formation mechanism first discovered in 2018. Bottom image shows the newly discovered formation mechanism for patchy proton aurora.
Credits: Emirates Mars Mission/UAE Space Agency
Full caption
“EMM’s global observations of the upper atmosphere provide a unique perspective on a region critical to MAVEN science," said MAVEN Principal Investigator Shannon Curry, of UC Berkeley’s Space Sciences Laboratory. “These types of simultaneous observations probe the fundamental physics of atmospheric dynamics and evolution and highlight the benefits of international scientific collaboration.”
EMM Science Lead Hessa Al Matroushi agreed. “Access to MAVEN data has been essential for placing these new EMM observations into a wider context,” she said. “Together, we’re pushing the boundaries of our existing knowledge not only of Mars, but of planetary interactions with the solar wind.”

Multi-vantage-point measurements have already proven to be an asset in Earth and heliophysics research. At Mars, over half a dozen orbiters are now taking science observations and with Mars’ southern hemisphere currently experiencing summer, when proton aurora is known to be most active, multi-vantage-point observations will be critical to understanding how these events form. The collaboration between EMM and MAVEN demonstrates the value of discovery-level science about the Martian atmosphere with two spacecraft simultaneously observing the same region.

MAVEN’s principal investigator is based at the University of California, Berkeley, while NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, manages the MAVEN mission. Lockheed Martin Space built the spacecraft and is responsible for mission operations. NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California provides navigation and Deep Space Network support. The Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics (LASP) at the University of Colorado Boulder is responsible for managing science operations and public outreach and communication.
By Willow Reed
MAVEN Communications Lead
Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, University of Colorado Boulder
Willow.Reed@colorado.edu
Media Contact:
Nancy Jones
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland
nancy.n.jones@nasa.gov

Last Updated: Aug 31, 2022
Editor: Bill Steigerwald

So I am short on time again. But it appears that the Protons rain directly into the Martian atmosphere sometimes.

I don't know if there is heavy water (+) ions in the solar wind, but if there are, then the ratio of heavy to normal Hydrogen has to be held suspect as telling how much atmosphere escaped.

More Later perhaps.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-25 17:55:31)

Void · 2022-09-26 20:49:33

I took a look, and the answer to heavy Hydrogen from the sun is ambiguous.

One article I encountered yesterday seemed to indicate that it can be created in a solar flare.

Here is an article I pulled up now: https://cip.hedbergandson.com/how-deuterium-is-formed

And it does appear that it can be created in a solar flare: Query: "Deuterium created in a solar flare"

Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=Deuterium … cc=0&ghpl=

So, I am not sure I trust the idea that the proportion of heavy Hydrogen on Mars will indicate the amount of water that has left Mars from dispersal into space.

It may be possible, that the solar wind has been distributing Hydrogen to the atmosphere of Mars over time, and that light Hydrogen from that has been leaving Mars afterwards in greater proportions than for heavy Hydrogen.

So, that has to be considered.

And using the Earth's water as a reference may be wrong as well, as some think that quite a bit of the Hydrogen in Earth's water came from the solar wind. It is true most likely that both Earth and Mars also loose Hydrogen to space, but I think that Earth will retain light Hydrogen better than Mars does. So, if we use Earth as a reference, it is also likely true that Earth has received an enrichment of heavy Hydrogen, but not so much as Mars.

Query: "How much of Earth's water came from the solar wind?"

Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=How+much+ … aa8634cbc3

https://singularityhub.com/2021/12/02/u … pace-dust/
Quote:

Up to Half of Earth’s Water May Come From Solar Wind and Space Dust
Luke Daly
By
Luke Daly
December 2, 2021

This mechanism is not the same as the solar wind entering the Martian atmosphere with a proton Aurora.

But it most likely existed for Mars as well. Closer to the asteroid belt, perhaps more dust as well, but of course a less dense solar wind.

We do know that charged particles enter the Earth's atmosphere while following the magnetic lines of force of the magnetic field. They enter towards the magnetic poles I believe.

And they do cause Auroras.

Well, OK, not so much Hydrogen or Protons for that: https://exploratorium.edu/learning_stud … 0the%20Sun.

So Mars has both Proton Aurora, and proton infused dust to bring Hydrogen. Earth only has proton infused dust.

I don't know if Heavy Hydrogen (+) ions can infuse dust.

So, as far as measurements go, I really don't think that Heavy Hydrogen proportion demonstrates any certainty of how much water has left Mars.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-26 21:15:48)

Void · 2022-09-26 21:21:21

Take it for what it might be worth, these are my thinking's, I suppose. No guarantees of correctness to the universe, perhaps.

But it is interesting:
1) Earth has a strong global magnetic field.
2) Mercury has a weak and leaky global magnetic field.
3) Mars does not have a global magnetic field, but spotty fossil magnetic fields, and an induced magnetic field.
4) Venus has an extremely weak global magnetic field but is actually protected by an induced magnetic field.

I wonder about a proton Aurora for Venus. Could protons from the solar wind convert to Hydrogen, and then provide food for microbes in the atmosphere? Fairly a long shot I will admit.

Information about microbes in Antarctica, suggest that a temperature of -20 degC is not a barrier to such microbes having an active metabolism. So, they could possibly be higher up in the atmosphere than the freezing point of water.

Another long shot might be Titan. It dwells mostly in the magnetic field of Saturn but not all the time.
https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resources/ … annotated/
Quote:

Titan Observed Naked in the Solar Wind (annotated)

And I don't get any sensible answers to that on the internet at this time.

But I have a notion that if a Hydrogen atmosphere could leak though water ice into a water ocean below. If Volcanos were also to present Oxidants to that ocean, then a biosphere might run on that.

And this: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/news/12455 … -on-titan/
Quote:

What is Consuming Hydrogen and Acetylene on Titan?

That also leads me to the question, "Can Hydrogen penetrate ice into an ice-covered ocean?".

So, this might exist for some planets orbiting a star, and perhaps for some Rogue Planets as well.

Speculations of course. But so, what.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-26 21:36:10)

Void · 2022-09-27 09:34:17

I have found that at times it is helpful to investigate what other people have been doing.

The Query: "life that breaths hydrogen", seems useful.

General Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=life+that … 9dc20dc023

In general, these materials suggest Super Earths which can hold a significant Hydrogen atmosphere.

I believe that even smaller planets may be able to do that, if they are Rogue Planets. And if the Hydrogen can get into ice covered oceans, and if other chemicals needed are in those oceans, even multicellular life may be possible.

https://phys.org/news/2010-04-scientist … d%20oxygen.
Quote:

Until now, the only life forms known to live exclusively in anoxic conditions were viruses, bacteria and Archaea. But in a new study, scientists have discovered three new multicellular marine species that appear to have never lived in aerobic conditions, and never metabolized oxygen.

But at this time I am also interested in the possibility that the solar wind(s) may provide Hydrogen to living things on a planet if the atmosphere is leaky, and protons convert to Hydrogen. In this case Hydrogen may not need to be a major component of an atmosphere, I think.

In some cases, Oxygen could co-exist with Hydrogen in an atmosphere, but only certain mixes would work.

Although the provision of Hydrogen to our polar areas by the dipole magnetism of our planet seems relatively small, I wonder if we do have living things that are technically getting Hydrogen from the solar wind.

https://cosmosmagazine.com/science/biol … f%20Miller
Quote:

16 November 2021
/
The Conversation
Antarctic bacteria live on air and use hydrogen as fuel
Scientists have found that hundreds of bacterial species in the frozen soils in East Antarctica use hydrogen to make water.

Quote:

Where do the bacteria find these energy-rich compounds? Believe it or not, the most reliable source is the air!
Air contains high levels of nitrogen, oxygen and carbon dioxide, but also trace amounts of the energy sources hydrogen, methane, and carbon monoxide.
They are only present in air in very low concentrations, but there is so much air it provides a virtually unlimited supply of these molecules for organisms that can use them.
And many can. Around 1% of Antarctic soil bacteria can use methane, and some 30% can use carbon monoxide.
More remarkably, our research suggests that 90% of Antarctic soil bacteria may scavenge hydrogen from the air.

So, a possible adaptation to Mars might be: Query: "Extracting Oxygen on Mars, using plasma"
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Extractin … cc4db0bb0a
Quote:

FUTURE colonists on Mars could use plasma technology to make their own oxygen. The atmosphere on Mars is 96 per cent carbon dioxide, says Vasco Guerra at the University of Lisbon in Portugal. This can be split to extract breathable oxygen and carbon monoxide, a fuel that could give us a “gas station on the Red Planet”, he says.
How we could make oxygen on Mars, plus fuel to get home
www.newscientist.com/article/mg23631494-700-how-we-could-make-oxygen-on-mars-plus-fuel-to-get-home/
www.newscientist.com/article/mg23631494-700-how-we-could-make-oxygen-o…

And that might work, but what if we subjected water steam as well? Honestly, I don't know. But it may be possible to make a mix that will not explode, and inject it into ice covered bodies of water, and to expect a biosphere to run off of it and perhaps even generate excess Oxygen.

This again: https://www.sciencealert.com/common-mic … heir%20own.

Microbes in The Ocean Depths Can Make Oxygen Without Sun. This Discovery Could Be Huge
NATURE
11 January 2022
ByDAVID NIELD

This may suggest that a whole biological method might be engineered for Mars and other places that might provide food from "Farms", and also Oxygen. Based on Plasma treatment of atmospheric gasses.

Enough for now, I guess.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-27 10:00:53)

Calliban · 2022-09-28 00:15:13

I heard about the plasma based process. I am a little sceptical that this really provides anything new that is more useful than established electrochemical methods. Consider that electrolysis of water into H2 and O2 is 60-80% efficient already. We can regenerate the water by reacting H2 with CO2 to form methane.

4H2 + CO2 = 2H2O + CH4

This is an exothermic reaction. Using plasma to break down CO2 means losing a lots of energy through radiated heat and chemical recombination. So I have to ask, what does it do for us that electrolysis and gas-shift reactions do not? Is it simpler and more compact? Are capital costs lower?

Regarding microbes that can produce O2 without sunlight: Sure, it's scientifically interesting. But the energy source still has to come from somewhere. Whether it is a chemical that you provide or artificial light that you generate. You pay for it either way. Efficiency is important. If we are driving this with synthetic energy, then we want the highest efficiency possible. Does this new discovery promiss an improvement on photosynthetic organisms?

One thing we know is that microalgae have a much higher photosynthetic efficiency than most other plants, but this seems to taper off with increasing light levels. Ice covered algae ponds are a simple and robust option for producing food and oxygen, that will work at low light levels provided you can keep the water liquid and warm enough for their metabolism. This may be one of the best tools available for terraforming Mars. It would work even better if we could alter the genetics to produce an algae that generates flourocarbons as a biproduct of photosynthesis.

I have no idea how we might do this, but a self-propagating flourocarbon factory offers a fast track for terraforming. If the atmospheric pressure can be increased to 0.2 bar, then food production can take place in non-pressurised poly-tunnels. Cities can be built under lightly pressurised steel frames with glass windows. This will be cheaper than trying to build everything underground. It also makes working outside much easier, as you don't need a pressure suit. You could make do with an oxygen mask and warm clothing. Thickening the atmosphere does have drawbacks when it comes to launching stuff into space. But it makes living on the planet a lot easier.

Once we venture further from the sun than the asteroid belt, most of the bodies that we encounter are dominated by water ice. Provided that we humans are able to provide a heat source, this is fortuitous. It means that terraforming can provide a huge number of aquatic habitats. Even for smaller bodies, these may be stable over geological timescales because a floating layer of surface ice provides the hydrostatic pressure needed to prevent the water from boiling into space. Oceanic algae will support a vast ecosystem. Humans could create 'land' by allowing gas to accumulate in pockets under the ice. Floating land masses could then be constructed as islands within the pockets.

Last edited by Calliban (2022-09-28 00:35:55)

Void · 2022-09-28 02:04:05

I value posts that you provide here. I think the analysis is useful. Using Plasma, Moxie, and Photosynthesis, could all be employed, as for some situations each may have its strengths.

Perhaps "Binary Contest Analysis" has value. I think it should be used, but sometimes the notion of compare and choose, then does not allow for the continuation of development of ideas. The classic "Apples and Oranges", might be an example. To say that one is better than the other, and then to eliminate one from further consideration, is not to find an advantage, in general situations. But say if you were going camping/hiking, it might be appropriate to choose one or the other. But if you are running a store, then you might want apples and oranges, not apples or oranges.

I still have a lot to learn, and in some ways the plasma tech can be a teacher, and entertainment as well.

Due to your post I decided to look deeper.
Query: "advantages of using plasma to split Martian CO2"

Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=advantage … 5e648e0247

A different query: "New plasma tech for Oxygen, fuel, and fertilizer from Martian Atmosphere"
General Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=New+plasm … cf027fe41d

In particular I like parts of this specific response: https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Pr … atmosphere
Quote:

New plasma tech for oxygen, fuel and fertiliser from Mars' atmosphere

Quote:

Using novel plasma reactors, researchers have shown that it is possible to extract key ingredients from Mars' carbon dioxide-rich atmosphere to provide future astronauts with oxygen, fuel and fertiliser. This technological leap could make it viable for humans to live on Mars.

Quote:

Speed is not the only benefit of the plasma conversion technique. It uses just 10% of the energy of the MOXIE electrolysis experiment and can be started up almost instantaneously, making it compatible with fluctuating solar energy on Mars.

The whole article is of interest actually.

They apparently need to have membranes to separate the Oxygen and CO2. I simply want to dissolve the mix in a body of water, and let biology consume the fuels, and likely leave behind some Oxygen, Nitrogen, and Argon. This tech apparently would use a "Cold Plasma". I really confess that I need to learn more about that.

There can be many ways to have ice involved reservoirs. A thinner ice cover might indeed facilitate photosynthesis.

A thicker one might facilitate mining, and the conservation of thermal energy. This might be accomplished by simply carving canals at the "Ground Line" of an ice slab on Mars. This would give access to minerals, and also a water media where the products of plasma splitting could be inserted. An example of an Ice slab may be quite thick.

Query: "Thickness of ice slabs on Mars"
General Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=Thickness … 03bd358de3

Specific Response: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way … ed-on-mars
Quote:

Thick, 'Rather Clean' Ice Sheets Are Spotted On Mars
January 11, 20183:05 PM ET
Merrit Kennedy 2018 square
MERRIT KENNEDY
Instagram
Twitter

Quote:

The researchers noticed that some of the cold, dry hillsides on Mars have naturally eroded to reveal vast deposits of ice, some of them more than 100 meters thick (around 330 feet). And because the steep slope showed the ice's vertical structure, the cross section also tells a story about their history.

Repeating this quote from previous in this post:

Quote:
Speed is not the only benefit of the plasma conversion technique. It uses just 10% of the energy of the MOXIE electrolysis experiment and can be started up almost instantaneously, making it compatible with fluctuating solar energy on Mars.

While energy acquisition may fluctuate in Martian settlements, the "Load" for energy will also fluxuate, so this method might be used to handle excess power availability.

Here is another article on the plasma method: https://www.space.com/mars-oxygen-production-plasma
Quote:

The approach could complement NASA's Mars Oxygen In-Situ Resource Utilization Experiment (MOXIE), a technology demonstration aboard the Perseverance rover. MOXIE extracts carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and turns it into oxygen and carbon monoxide, but in order to make that happen at a meaningful scale, a similar device would need to consume a huge amount of power.

So, I am happy to entertain Photosynthesis, Plasma, and Moxie. My guess is that they will all be used, in ways that may produce the most benefit.

I will note that it seems valuable to the USA or UK, and others, to approach space using various international and national and economic entities, as they may produce thinking that might be outside of what the USA or UK might produce. A wider view of possibilities.

Having said that, however a "UN" production would likely just waste money, time, and efforts. So, there is international and there is international.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-28 02:49:09)

Void · 2022-09-28 09:30:39

Pertaining to the previous post, I am interested in how well water vapor could be split using the cold plasma method(s).

It should be very easy to have a containment with low pressure low temperature steam in it, at ~Martian ambient pressures.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-28 09:31:26)

Void · 2022-09-28 11:37:25

We have seen this material before. This one seems to be a little less sensational, maybe voicing existing concerns to overcome. So, I trust it more.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Gr … &FORM=VIRE

If someone wants to look further:
Query: "Growing Plants with Acetate".
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Growing+P … 9d0c9a2fb0

The results for Algae x 4, and Yeast x 18 sound good, but I think more needs to be revealed, or the specmanship might be questionable.

Done

Last edited by Void (2022-09-28 11:48:57)

Calliban · 2022-09-28 14:07:27

Void wrote:

Pertaining to the previous post, I am interested in how well water vapor could be split using the cold plasma method(s).
It should be very easy to have a containment with low pressure low temperature steam in it, at ~Martian ambient pressures.
Done.

I don't know enough about the technology. But I would point out that electrolysis is already 60 - 80% efficient (depending on current density). Even if a more efficient process can be found (which is unlikely), any improvement is subject to diminishing returns.

Growing plants with acetate:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/envi … ng-out-how

This is certainly interesting. If we could use hydrogen and CO2 to produce sodium acetate, then this could be a useful way of increasing food production.

Acetic acid can be produced by carbonylation of methanol.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetic_acid

First we produce methanol from hydrogen and captured CO2:

3H2 + CO2 = H2O + CH3OH

Then we convert the methanol to acetic acid:

CH3OH + CO = CH3COOH

Then we react acetic acid with caustic soda:

CH3COOH + NaOH = NaCH3COO + H20

The heat of combustion of acetic acid is 14,583KJ/kg. A total of 4 mols (8 grams) of hydrogen are needed to produce 60 grams (1 mol) of acetic acid. The heat of combustion of 8 grams of H2 is 1.13488MJ. The heat of combustion of 60 grams of acetic acid is 0.87498MJ. So in a perfectly efficient process, we could convert hydrogen energy in acetic acid with efficiency of 77%. Electrolysis of water may be 80% efficient, so electricity to acetic acid efficiency is up to 61.7% efficient.

If sodium acetate is a more efficient energy source to a plant than photosynthesis, then the process is promissing, as even red light LEDs are only 30% efficiency.
https://phys.org/news/2010-08-red-light … iency.html

Last edited by Calliban (2022-09-28 14:48:36)

Void · 2022-09-28 18:39:05

Reading your post, and looking it over some more, I think I can come to a very strong agreement to what you have said Calliban.

This showed up today, and I have not viewed it all yet, but it looks rather good: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Ma … M%3DHDRSC3

This could look good for people situated like the UK. I am thinking that "Ships", "Tankers", might be able to venture where wind and solar are of a good benefit. For wind of course that is near you.

But I also think of ships towed with a lighter than air sail. Then turbines dragged through the water. The ships filled, then parked offshore but connected to a pipeline for a city, some safe distance away.

Antarctica has the 40's, 50's, and 60's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roaring_Forties
Quote:

Similar but even stronger conditions that occur at more southerly latitudes are called the Furious Fifties and the Shrieking or Screaming Sixties.

Quote:

Wind power
The strong and continuous winds in the Roaring Forties make this zone highly prospective for wind power such as in New Zealand and Tasmania.[5]

Now as far as local intermittent green energy, I have previously suggested fracking a heat exchanger into deep rocks, filling with a fluid, probably water, and then running an electric current through it to heat the water. I think that a voltage no more than 50 volts might be tolerated, but with a very high current. Could this be done without inducing electrolysis? Do you think DC or AC might be best?

Here I am thinking of long-term storage. Say to store hot water for utilities in cities. I myself live in Minnesota, so a method to store summer energy, or the intermittent energy of wind, may serve us here as well. We do get almost as cold as Manitoba but are more southern than that so our solar may be pretty good.

Here is some of Peter Zeihans stuff: https://www.bing.com/images/search?view … ajaxserp=0

Hopefully it is OK to look at it. As you can see my location(s) are not too far from the wind of the Dakota's, and some degree of fair solar projects up the center of the North American continent, quite far north.

Of course we will tend to have extra energy in the summer, as our loads may not be that high. And for cooling buildings in the summertime, a heat pump might do that and help put heat into the heat exchanger.

Of course places like Texas could possibly store cold in such a heat exchanger, or maybe heat at a different time of the year. Maybe heat exchangers for hot and cold.

Such a fracked heat exchanger, will be a bit complex however, as fluid inlets and outlets are needed.

What do you think about using an electric current to heat one?

------

As for food, this query also brings some interesting articles: "Nature.com, "A hybrid inorganic-biological artificial photosynthesis system for energy-efficient food production.-""

General Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=Nature.co … b5bf8ac307

A specific response: https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio … production

Many of the methods mentioned in this post might have applications on Mars, I think.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-28 19:11:03)

Void · 2022-09-29 11:22:47

I just copied this from "Index» Science, Technology, and Astronomy» Climate Change - History and Forecasts»", Post #93 by VOID

Quote:

Some may want to read this. It seems to me that the USA does make contributions. Actually, using natural gas is one such, it just needs more care about leaks.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arc … nt/671579/
Quote:
The Senate Just Quietly Passed a Major Climate Treaty
Done

A member here a few days back was indicating a notion that the "Climate Crisis" was causing drying out, droughts. At that time it occurred to me that a warmer atmosphere should carry more moisture. As a side note an increase of CO2, also makes it easier for many plants to capture Carbon, while loosing less moisture. I have been thinking about the feedback relationships more.

Among things that the "Dread Thinkers", have thought up over time is that the greenhouse effect could increase snowfall in Antarctica. I think that makes fair sense, as Antartica as a whole has the cold of being polar and the cold of high altitude.

Query: "How high is the Antarctic ice cap?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_ice_sheet

Well, this is a more appropriate Query: "What is the altitude of the Antarctic ice sheet?"

Well, this is old, but I guess Mediocracies would say it was "Good Enough". Good Map.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/image … -elevation

Query: "What is the altitude of Earth's Troposphere?" (The Troposphere is where most of the moisture should be).
https://teacherscollegesj.org/what-is-t … oposphere/
Query: "What is the altitude of the Troposphere in Antarctica?"
https://scied.ucar.edu/learning-zone/at … 0summer%29.
Nice diagram of the atmospheric column.

So, if the atmosphere warms, it will increase altitudes, and also the Troposphere will get higher, that is more moisture will ascend higher up.

The negative nellies have historically indicated that global warming will be more noticeable at higher latitudes, the polar areas. I think that is likely. If you put a blanket over the poles, and yet allow warmth from the low latitudes to flow with winds and sea currents, that makes sense.

Then I thought about altitudes of glaciers on Mountains. It is said that they are melting due to global warming. I'm not sure that that makes sense. Moisture flow should be from warm areas to colder areas. At higher altitudes there should be less greenhouse effect than there could be at sea level. (If you don't consider other possible factors).

Well, some clouds can hold heat, and some can shade. So, that is a bit of a wild card. But if you have more clouds, shouldn't then there likely be more moisture flowing to the mountains? I will confess the notion that if seas get warmer, at night they will likely develop more night fogs, but that then holds in the days heat, and after all fogs are just low-lying clouds, therefore moisture in the atmosphere.

For Mountains this is not as true. The difference between day/night temperatures should be greater than for sea level, sea surface, as they have thousands of feet of greenhouse gasses insulating them from the cold of the universe. I would think that with increased moisture being pumped into the atmosphere out of the oceans, night-time conditions on elevated areas should cause more precipitation.

The only possible exception I can think of for this is if the ocean currents had speeded up, and so more cold water was flowing down to the ocean parts that are adjacent to temperate desert locations. I am inclined to think however that this cold water would tend to flow to the deeper parts of the ocean basins.

So, I have a problem thinking that a run-away greenhouse effect would cause more desert and drought.

Does anyone have thinking to correct my presumptions on this feedback situation?

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-29 11:55:00)

Void · 2022-09-29 18:55:32

I feel the desire to try to make a more compact summation of what was in my last post.

As I understand humidity and precipitation, as might be affected by a greenhouse effect, the greenhouse effect should heat lower elevations more than higher elevations.

The Oceans cover most of the low elevations. Also, lowlands could also be heated. But high elevations should see an increase of precipitation because they are likely heated relatively less than lowlands, as they have less atmosphere above them.

If I boil a pot of water in a small room, and I have windows exposed to cold air, then some of that water will migrate to the windows and precipitate there.

On Earth, water vapor being lighter than air tends to make the air it is in rise. Precipitation tends to fall.

So, if you really want to know if the greenhouse effect is increasing, then you should check on the rainfall and snowfall in the mountains.

Another factor of elevations is that they cool off faster than typical lowlands at night, as the atmosphere above them is thinner and should water vapor from the low areas have risen to these altitudes the opportunity for precipitation may exist. And of course, weather has high and low fronts with various air of different temperatures sweeping through and mingling. Another opportunity for precipitation.

I guess I will leave it like that.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-09-29 19:02:42)

Void · 2022-10-01 20:28:35

I am again kind of interested in Red Dwarf worlds. But it is late.

Proxima Centauri: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxima_Centauri

Actually 'b' is interesting, but I have my eye on 'd', or worlds something like it. Granted, it may not have an atmosphere. Also, it may not exist actually.

https://astronomical.fandom.com/wiki/Pr … er%20found.
Quote:

Proxima Centauri b's mass.[1] The radial velocity signal of Proxima d was later confirmed by Faria et al. in a follow up analysis in February 2022.
The planet is a sub-Earth that has at least one-quarter of the mass of the Earth (twice that of Mars), orbiting around 0.029 AU (4.3 million million km; 2.7 million mi) away from Proxima Centauri every 5.1 days. It is the least massive and innermost planet of the Proxima Centauri system and is currently the least massive extrasolar planet detected with the radial velocity method.
The planet's equilibrium temperature is around 360 K (87 °C; 188 °F), making it too hot to be habitable.

With an atmosphere, or without an atmosphere, I think it could be habitable. It also might be a good target for a interstellar expedition.

With an atmosphere, it may have a habitable dark side.

More likely no significant atmosphere, but I think likely lots of ices on the dark side, like the poles of our Moon and Mercury as well. If there is sufficient heating, such as from tidal forces and radio-active decay, there could be enough heat for a under ice sea resembling those that exist in ice shell worlds of our solar system.

Such a world might be usable, and perhaps even terraform able. And a very good gravity well to mine. Maybe even better if no atmosphere, per the use of Mass Drivers.

-------

I am also interested in these: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/new-cl … tmospheres
Image quote: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/file … k=BahewIWa
Quote:

A new study in the journal Astronomy and Astrophysics, using data from NASA's Spitzer and Kepler space telescopes, offers the best-yet picture of what these planets are made of. They used the telescope observations to calculate the densities more precisely than ever, then used those numbers in complex simulations. Researchers determined that all of the planets are mostly made of rock. Additionally, some have up to 5 percent of their mass in water, which is 250 times more than the oceans on Earth.

We have previously been assured that red dwarf worlds will not have atmospheres. But a world with up to 5% water, (Maybe), seems difficult to reconcile with having no atmosphere except if it were very cold.

Even 'h' may be tidal locked, and if so, would have a side that faces the star. I would be interested in it as it is, and as an advanced civilization might utilize it.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-02 11:26:21)

Void · 2022-10-02 12:23:35

This is a graft from another topic:

Void
Member
Registered: 2011-12-29
Posts: 4,811
Email
I apologize for obscuring other members posts. I agree that we may be most interested in the "Near" uses of these robots, but at some point, I did take an interstellar view. But in this topic, I will look more at the "Near" utility of the device, and perhaps post less, to leave room for work from other members as it might benefit me to have those, and is a more polite thing to do.
I will take the more "Far" view over to: "Index» Terraformation» Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.", perhaps beginning at or around post #522.
I consider the Moon to be in the "Near" category, but Mars to be in the "Far" category, because of time latency. Perhaps this will suit you (th)?
Done.
Note: Calliban, kbd512, and (th) have some valuable posts on page #2 at least, which the viewers may consider having a look at.
Last edited by Void (Today 12:27:57)

From: "Index» Martian Politics and Economy» Humanoid Robots Could Build Martian Settlements", post #53

The materials I would like to include would very likely get in the way of that discussion, and yet here I will be relatively free to explore the entire view that I have of this.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-02 12:25:59)

Void · 2022-10-02 12:28:53

The idea of a humanoid robot would have some significant value, especially if the robot is to actually be human similar.

I want to explore Jor El within Superman's command key. A sort of CD ROM?
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Jo … M%3DHDRSC3

In realty perhaps not that advanced, perhaps just a "Library". Possibly implanted into a human or robot body/brain/mind.

Perhaps recordable in a human life of the life of a robot. Perhaps a thing that can be distilled and copied and given as inheritance to further humans/robots.

This might help to bridge the gap between human and robot and could also pave the way for Cyborgs.

So, a child might have libraries from various other people/robots.

The problem with library is librarians. They can be quite wicked. Where their responsibility is to steer civilization towards a greater good, they also may attempt to castrate/mutilate the human mind to make people their servants. So, I think it good to be aware of those who do not seek the benefit of individuals and societies, but which to enslave them.

I would think that these may not involve an entity in your head, but rather perhaps if you might like, the memories of a parent that you might have as an "Inheritance". It would be silly to include all details but would be more like an Encyclopedia. And perhaps this would require less brain power to access and also perhaps write to than say "Nura link".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVvmgjBL74w

Enough of that. Something else next.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-02 12:44:22)

Void · 2022-10-02 14:54:22

Some Library then:

" 09-30-2022, TESLABOT REVEALED Scott Walter on the MECHANICS of Tesla's Optinus!, Dr. Know-it-all Knows it all, Utube"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5xTTTYj644

I like the detail that they go into for the robot.

------

I believe that this one is from Tesla/Elon Musk: Working on it.

Well, if I find some stuff, I will clip it here.

Not done.

Last edited by Void (2022-10-02 15:05:08)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#501 2022-09-20 11:26:09

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#502 2022-09-20 14:37:31

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#503 2022-09-20 20:00:05

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#504 2022-09-21 09:41:44

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#505 2022-09-21 18:28:00

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#506 2022-09-21 18:30:07

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#507 2022-09-21 19:28:12

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#508 2022-09-22 12:12:32

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#509 2022-09-23 09:11:43

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#510 2022-09-25 17:36:16

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#511 2022-09-26 20:49:33

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#512 2022-09-26 21:21:21

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#513 2022-09-27 09:34:17

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#514 2022-09-28 00:15:13

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#515 2022-09-28 02:04:05

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#516 2022-09-28 09:30:39

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#517 2022-09-28 11:37:25

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#518 2022-09-28 14:07:27

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#519 2022-09-28 18:39:05

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#520 2022-09-29 11:22:47

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#521 2022-09-29 18:55:32

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#522 2022-10-01 20:28:35

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#523 2022-10-02 12:23:35

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#524 2022-10-02 12:28:53

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#525 2022-10-02 14:54:22

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

Board footer