You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: This forum is accepting new registrations via email. Please see Recruiting Topic for additional information. Write newmarsmember[at_symbol]gmail.com.
  1. Index
  2. » Search
  3. » Posts by Void

#8826 Re: Terraformation » "Terraforming" the Asteroid Belt » 2014-11-05 11:34:09

I would handle the outside with a upgrade of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lethbridge

I hope my math is correct 150 (68.0389 kg) pound person could have a suit of a weight of 5555.55 LB ( 2519.96 kg).  That could include spiked wheels to try to deal with inertia.

I would have the human in a subsuit under the frame.  The subsuit would be large enough to allow body functions without unsuiting as I have spoken of in other threads.  This would also be good, because you could incorporate significant solar cells, and batteries (Or other storage method).

#8827 Re: Terraformation » "Terraforming" the Asteroid Belt » 2014-11-02 15:07:03

I think I like most of whats going on here.  Yes, I guess the underwater synthetic gravity is a lot of fuss.

I do think I might have a better plan.

Suppose Ceres is a glacier covered worldlet (Most likely).

Then perhaps excavate a cylindrical hole with sufficient floor space to hold a toroid spin device.  Put a lake in the bottom of the shaft.   Depending from the toroid, a rigid metal continuous skirt which projects deep into the water.  This holding a bubble of air.  When stationary, the bottom of this boat would be touching water.  But as you spun it up, most likely the bubble of air would take the form of a bowl, and the skirt would be impinged into the sides of the bowl.

I see that this could have stability problems, so it would have to be engineered well.  I don't at this time know what the best form of it would be.  I don't know how happy the water would be having that ring skirt passing through it at a high velocity.  To aid in stability, the center of the disk could still float in water because it's relative speed would be small.  The drag would be relatively small.  The faster moving parts would be floating on a captive bubble of air.  But the skirt ring would surely be moving at a quite high speed through the water.  It is possible that it would be necessary to continuously pump make up air into the captive bubble and let some of it leak under the skirt ring.  Then the device would be more like a spinning hovercraft.

I would imagine of course that the walls of the ice shaft would be covered with manufactured materials, and that a roof would be in place.  Using tensile and compressive methods I suppose if you would want skylights.  Otherwise if you put it deep in the ice you would be able to use gravitational counter pressure to hold the roof down.

Why?  Just something to think through.  Perhaps less building materials required?  Perhaps less rocket monkey work.  Good radiation shielding?  Being able to put on a suit and work on the surface.

I'm not in a competitive mode here, Just offering options to consider.

Yes I think an atmosphere for Ceres is a very long shot unless very advanced methods were used.  (Mega structure, ect.)  But I don't mind if someone wants to try to figure it out.  Perhaps a spinning magnetic field would not only keep the solar wind off, but would curve the escape path of molecules and turn them around to head back towards Ceres?  But a lot of effort to try to make real estate that is not very good starting material for a surface biosphere capable.

Even if it could be figured out, I am not sure it would be the best bang for the buck.

#8828 Re: Terraformation » "Terraforming" the Asteroid Belt » 2014-11-02 11:56:30

That's an interesting plan.

What if you ran a electric current through your torus, like an induction motor stator.  The upper atmosphere being ionized might be caused to rotate counter to the rotation of Ceres to a null speed relative to the sun (As a reference point).  And you would have a magnetic field.  Ideally, you would somehow get the power for that from the solar wind itself somehow.  I have seen plans of how to harvest enormous amounts of energy from the solar wind, but I don't yet have a model for doing it in this case.

Alternately, perhaps an electric current can run through the plasma of the upper atmosphere.  I have read that the University of Wisconsin is doing that in a fusion reactor proto type, so that there magnets don't have to be as big.  Don't know if very thin plasma will conduct a current, don't know that it won't, don't know.

I think my plan of inhabiting the water would be a precursor to your plan.  It offers levels of safety that later will not be needed as much because of the build up of local capabilities to counter mishaps.

#8829 Re: Terraformation » "Terraforming" the Asteroid Belt » 2014-11-02 10:05:10

OK, I have had an idea now and then about Ceres.

It has enough solar energy to be solar powered.  Presuming it is differentiated and has a world wide glacier at the surface that could be partially liquefied with heat.

I have wondered if a underwater synthetic gravity could be implemented.

I suggest multiple shells.  The gaps between the shells filled with a fluid suitable.  Then the innermost one spinning fast enough for sufficient synthetic gravitation. Suppose it required 4 shells, the outer one stationary relative to the surrounding water or ice.  The required total spin being divided between each of the 3 shells as you go inward with visualization.  So shell 1 stationary.  Shell 2 at 1/3 required speed, Shell 3 at 2/3 required speed, and finally Shell 4 at the required speed.  The spinning would generate heat, but the heat can be dissipated into the ocean or sea or lake to keep the water melted.  One nice thing about an ocean on Ceres, is you can have a really deep one before the pressures become hostile to human life.  So done that way, Ceres provides a 3 dimensional habitat that could be filled with such machines for synthetic gravity.

I would begin the process by crashing a Iron/Nickel asteroid onto the ice to both provide the metals, and to of course melt a body of water under the ice.

The method I previously mentioned elsewhere (And no one replied), would be to send an automated probe composed of a flying saucer shaped balloon.  I should have a tether. and when it would arrive at the Iron/Nickel asteroid, it would use a method to anchor the tether.  Then the spin of the asteroid would cause a deviation in the projected orbit of the asteroid and be so engineered as to intercept Ceres.

The reason I think it would work, is that when this balloon was opposing the solar wind, a bow shock would be more intense than when it was being aided by the solar wind.  So, I think spin energy shed during opposition would be greater than spin energy added when it is running with the solar wind.  And the balloon would not need to be pressurized except when it was first deployed and expanded.

Anyway so I don't quickly get the pillow over the face routine, I will say that by some other method also a Iron/Nickel asteroid could be diverted to strike Ceres.

Pictures referenced from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceres_(dwarf_planet)

250px-Ceres_Cutaway.jpg

Ceres (bottom left), the Moon and the Earth, shown to scale
200px-Ceres_Earth_Moon_Comparison.png

So having the potential for a very large population perhaps?

Solar panels over it all?

A space elevator seems reasonable to me.  Ceres would be the perfect pseudo Earth with a very low gravity.

It would be a great asset to then provide support for mining operations all though the asteroid belt, and those minerals being quite an asset to a solar civilization I think.

#8830 Re: Terraformation » Venus » 2014-10-31 12:15:26

Oh, and I forgot to mention that if you have a ring partially powered by solar wind that also gently touches the atmosphere, then you have a means to change the rotation of Venus.  You could either make it tidal locked, or increase the spin.  If tidal locked, then with other components in place perhaps it would be possible to cause a continuous CO2 rain on the dark side in higher levels of the atmosphere which would bring cold down to the lower levels.  Potentially making areas of the surface more thermally compatible with mining, and also causing a quicker cool down.  Getting rid of the stratification problem.

#8831 Re: Terraformation » Venus » 2014-10-31 11:33:49

Well that may be true, but it would require a culture I don't think the present form of human could generate.

If you could mine the atmosphere of Venus, then terraforming may pay it's own way.  But investing massive efforts for a payoff that would come a very long time later is not a business model I am familiar with.  Certainly I don't think any economic system of the 20th or 21st century would have worked that way. 

And anyway, why not harvest the atmosphere?  That's a lot of Carbon which might be quite useful to the human race if it were taken into space.

#8832 Re: Terraformation » Venus » 2014-10-31 10:15:43

Is it ok if I use your term "a topopolis" Karov?

From the thread: ""Terraforming" the Asteroid Belt by Tom Kalbfus"

So, rather ambitious, but still, how about a mostly Carbon Toroid, porous, not particularly pressurized, but by methods enriched with atmospheric gasses in it's interior.

With some tensile strength and compressive strength, just maybe does not have to have the correct orbital energy for the altitude that it dwells at.

The atmospheric and solar wind molecules which impinge on it providing both drag and in the case of solar wind thrust.  Thrust by sails deployed appropriately to either thrust with photons, or solar wind itself.

And of course you could use electrified tethers either up or down, to either generate electricity or thrust.  Unlike a space elevator, however, the severing of one tether is not a disaster.  Tethers can also draw ions up from below if you use the correct current flow.  Therefore the body of the device does not have to be a low risky altitude.

Seems to me that there is enough thrust to compensate for atmospheric drag already spoken of here, but of course more conventional thrust methods could be employed such as Ion thrusters, but I don't think they are needed. But also maybe the toroid might have magnetic and electrical stimulations, to provide thrust, where the toroid is like a rotor in an induction motor, and the Solar wind and atmospheric plasma like the stator.  And then there could be the inch worm method, where the toroid is has movable motorized elements that act against each other and so displace mass which I think might also potentially generate thrust.

So then from atmosphere for building materials, you have Carbon, Plastics, and Sulfur (Which is a metal in a vacuum I have read).
And nothing would stop you from capturing asteroids, or importing materials from Luna or Mercury.

I am of course intending that the exposure to atmosphere will be very rarified, and perhaps in the case of Venus, only encountered on the leeward side (The solar wind being the reference).

And I am thinking of using Adsorption in the Carbon, particularly if it is cold, and some parts will be.

Concentrating the molecules can be by cold and heat processes, or you might also consider flowing currents.  For water, it is possible to attract positive ions with a negative charge.

By way of static methods, you would then have a bottle charged inside to an even higher negative voltage, so that the ions attracted would form a skin.  An atmosphere held by electrostatic force, and electrostatic condensation.

And then a mechanical pump to pump that skin of gas into a container, and neutralize it's electrical charge.

Of course the interior of the toroid would be a passageway in a circle, and place where suited persons could work, and also their habitats could be inside of it or outside.

So then Venus has a major export.  Mined atmosphere, some bound for Mars perhaps.  Maybe a tropical Mars in the end after all.

#8833 Re: Terraformation » Venus » 2014-10-29 05:46:50

True.  I guess whoever is running things will have to decide when it's time to stop.  I will say though that if you reduce the pressure on the surface, I would expect the body of the planet to shed even more voltile materials. 

For my part though I choose to see Venus not as a planet gone wrong, but perhaps as a big bowl of pudding.  If you once have floating habitats, perhaps you are happy with that for thousands of years. 

If it is cooled and you eventually add liquid water to the surface, it will cause an alteration of processes I think, explosive volcanic eruptions perhaps.  The existing mountains I believe are much taller than would be propper for that environment, the rocky materials being stiffer due to a lack of water.  And then if plate tectonics were to start up presumably quakes.  I'm not sure the surface would be a great place to dwell, except for required functions such as mining.

So I see a terraformed surface as a very secondary objective.  Capturing the atmosphere and using it to a good end being the primary.  But that's just my preference.

#8834 Re: Terraformation » Venus » 2014-10-28 14:00:12

Actually I am speculating that with Automation and 3D printers, it might be possible to mass produce such machines in an off planet location at a relatively low cost.  Parts interchangeable.

Have a repair station to salvage parts from broken machines that are going to be junked, and then repair the ones that can be repaired.  Use Carbon for parts where possible.  Build the machines for a life expectancy, and then use the materials for floating habs, after they are juked, unless they crash.

For power of course solar perhaps or perhaps somehow wind.  Part of their task might be to shoot Bullets of CO ice into the Exosphere.

For Extraction from the Exosphere there are many notions already, but I am thinking that since the atmosphere of Venus often has a tail like a comet, an orbiter higher up than you might think, where when not in the tail solar wind is used to add energy to the orbit, and when in the tail collection of atmospheric molecules would be implemented.  I am fairly aware of how much energy has to be disposed of for that, but I have some ideas that might be a suitable starting point.

#8835 Re: Terraformation » Venus » 2014-10-28 10:28:26

Actually, I'm not going to settle on that.

I mentioned 3 manufactured materials: Soot, CO, and Smog.

https://web.anl.gov/PCS/acsfuel/preprin … 9_0169.pdf

Causing the creation of Sulfur Dioxide from a reaction of Sulfuric Acid with Carbon (Soot),

Objective Sulfur Dioxide clouds, and smog layers above the Sulfuric Acid cloud layer.  Cooling, lowering the Sulfuric Acid cloud deck, reducing the amount of Sulfuric acid.  Hoping to get some of it to react with mountain rocks as thing cool.

Meanwhile, injecting Carbon, Carbon Monoxide into the very upper atmosphere where the shredding effects of radiation should render it Monatomic.  Harvesting the upper atmosphere by means not yet very well mentioned, but I have notions, which comes before a plan.

The point being I want the atmosphere of Venus.  Want to be able to capture it to orbit, want Carbon especially, since there are so many things that can be made with it.  Carbon would be quite useful to attempt to capture from the atmosphere I think, and Hydrogen from the solar wind.

Terraforming Venus is an afterthought.  Indeed, if can extract Carbon, Oxygen, Nitrogen to orbit, then very rich, maybe can sell it, make things out of it.  If you can capture solar wind as Karov has tilted towards, then you might also have Hydrogen.

But Sulfuric acid is the enemy of machines which would float and alter atmospheric chemistry.  So, get rid of it as fast as you can.  I would also like to be able to get Sulfur to orbit, but that's an optional desire.

As for habitation, if you can extract the atmosphere then why squander it.  After the chemistry has been made more friendly......then floating cities with people.

#8836 Re: Terraformation » Venus » 2014-10-28 08:11:54

I wonder if Iron Pyrites.  Maybe too hot for it though.  One trick I might think to try to employ to get rid of the acid clouds, would be to inject iron dust.  Then that would condense.

Alternately, I am thinking automated floating machines, which extract Carbon from the atmosphere to make soot.  Nuclear winter notion.  The carbon would also react with the acid clouds changing the chemistry.

Smog?  SO2 clouds instead?

Anti-Greenhouse effect like Titan.

And then there would be the notion of just extracting CO, that would be like releasing a fuel into the acid clouds.  Of course you would be releasing a lot of O2, but that can likely dissolve into the atmosphere and stay out of the way long enough to make chemical changes.

Having a sooty atmosphere with possible S02 clouds, perhaps the Acid clouds would be driven down far enough to react with the rocks of high mountains and dissipate.

The robotic floaters, making the soot and CO, could be visited by humans occasionally when certain repairs are required, but I see no reason why you would want to put people at risk until the environment was greatly improved.

I am more interested in harvesting chemicals from the atmosphere, by intercepting them in the very highest layers, capturing them and so using them.  I see value in using Carbon in Orbit, to assist in that project.

And Karov I am interested in figuring out a way to capture and use the solar wind as well.

#8837 Re: Life support systems » Greenhouse - hydroponics vs soil » 2014-10-23 08:13:45

Your ideas seem good.

Our objectives are different but not in conflict.

You are trying to provide a environment which will provide generalized more conventional agriculture.

I have been trying to find a minimal environment to grow a bulk or bulk crops of a value similar to hay for instance.

Plankton tolerant of low temperatures 32 degrees fresh water, would not require much Oil bag counter pressure above them.  Maybe 1 foot ~10 mb + ambient of +5.5 mb = ~15.5 mb?

If you use salt water, you can lower the temperature and the pressure, but the salt would be corrosive, and as you have pointed out their is value in having a significant oil layer above the water bag.

Artic fresh water pond plants would be one option.  However to be useful, they will have to tolerate low temperatures, which I think is likely, but also significantly low pressures.  For instance 2 feet of oil bag above 32-39 degree fresh water would be about ~20 mb  + about ~5.5 mb ambient pressure = ~25.5 mb counter pressure.  Of course the water bag itself should be able to hold a differential internal pressure.  But minimizing requirements would make the system more stable.
I don't know if Arctic pond plants could be adapted to such low pressures.

The low pressures would be why you might want to have the suit I previously indicated.  That coupled with a vertical drop off going down as much as 33 feet would allow you to have a barometric airlock system for the suit.  However normal airlock methods where the suit docks to an airlock should work OK.

For higher temperature plants Elodea for instance you would want an oil counter pressure of 7 feet, I think ~70 mb.  But in that case you could have water temperatures that were not as hostile to the human in the suit.  They would sill need pressure protection.

Sorry I did not do the metric conversions. I have limited time.

For the above, I am presuming that the oil will have a specific gravity close to that of fresh water.

One thing to think about is that by the time there are people on Mars, it should be possible to break down "Hay" like plant products into sugars and fuels.

One thing that has also occurred to me is that if you have an oil with Paraffin in it, in cold temperatures the Paraffin may gel, making the window translucent instead of transparent.  This could be a benefit to block the exit of heat at night.  A night shade.

In the case of the apparatus I have suggested, in the morning sunshine, then you might not get all the light through the window, but as soon as the ambient environment warms up, the heat from the water bag below and the sunshine should cause the Paraffin to be absorbed back into the oil, and so become more transparent again.  It may be a net benefit.

#8838 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Habcrafts and Cyclers » 2014-10-19 09:58:20

I might have missed it, perhaps it was already said, but a highly skilled person capable of productive behaviors hired for mineral extraction from asteroids and or Mars, must likely draw very large wages, and upon finishing that career might choose to settle on Mars, having a lot of wealth, being able to be a significant investor in business activity on that planet.

Mars would support the asteroid mining, Earth & Mars would get needed minerals.

As for another method, since there are so many people who might wish to go one way to Mars, perhaps a lottery.  Some of them would be willing to buy a ticket periodically, knowing that they were supporting the effort and had a small chance of winning a ticket.

#8839 Re: Terraformation » Balloon alteration of a eliptical objects orbit. » 2014-10-19 09:47:45

If this were considered for Mars, It might make the most sense to put in place the super greenhouse gasses of choice first which might require a human presence on Mars before the impact.  If the South Polar cap, then the size would need to be enough to vaporize the bulk of CO2 in it, but not to sear the planet with water vapor steam or at least not too much.

Certainly if using greenhouse gasses, you could simply wait for the caps to thaw, but this would hurry things up quite a bit I think, and timing might be important.

Human culture is not unlike the stock market, it fluctuates, and is more or less subject to something like A.D.D.

Presuming that an effort had been mounted to get humans to Mars, you could not necessarily count on it to be sustained for decades since notions of what is important go in and out of style.  It would really be nice to have Mars upgraded to a average pressure of 11+ mb and to have significant greenhouse gasses in it.

#8840 Terraformation » Balloon alteration of a eliptical objects orbit. » 2014-10-18 12:29:34

Void
Replies: 4

I am thinking of the type of balloon that was experimented on already, where it is inflated in orbit, but does not retain pressure after that.

I am thinking of placing that in synchronous orbit of a asteroid or comet and also tethering it to the object. 

A passive version of this then interacts with the solar wind as the asteroid or comet spins.  When it opposes the solar wind the bow shock is more significant.  When moving in the same direction, then less force. 

The objective would be to alter the orbit of the object to serve a collision purpose.  More or less after installed rotational energy would be exchanged for an alteration of orbit around the sun.

A less passive version would have a saucer shaped balloon that could pivot on it's tether.  I presume that a rectifying device could extract energy from the differential voltage between the balloon and the object as conducted through the tether.  That stored electrical power would allow it to present a greater or lesser resistance to the solar wind.

Preferred targets might be Ceres and Callisto.  If habitation of those objects were considered then an iron/nickle object delivered for collision would provide an ice covered lake and iron/nickle.  Timing would be important.  Delivering humans and their machines to the area of impact before the ice got too thick.

Then keeping the lake liquid with fusion power I presume.

Mars can also be considered, it's polar ice caps, but I suppose there will be a human population there before such a mission could be mounted.  That would complicate things.
If the North cap then a lake.  If the south, then vaporize the CO2, and temporarily inflate the atmosphere.  Perhaps if at a point where sufficient greenhouse gasses were deployed,  that timing to inflate the atmosphere would be good.

I am also thinking of Orion nuclear methods to fine tune the impact area.  Fission or Fusion.

But I am more interested in Ceres, Callisto and objects beyond.

#8841 Re: Life support systems » Greenhouse - hydroponics vs soil » 2014-10-18 12:16:30

I was not thinking about that radiation protection feature.  Sounds good.

#8842 Re: Life support systems » Greenhouse - hydroponics vs soil » 2014-10-17 14:13:20

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/italian-firm-a … es-1470226

http://3dprint.com/17179/wasp-3d-printed-houses/

Mud would have limited value on Mars.  Quality mud not being that likely, and it's strengths being poor.

However if you do have a green house that can be low pressure and can grow a plant that will provide suitable fibers, and have a binder, then I can see where this could be useful to make complex artificial wood objects.

I don't have a better plant, so I will mention Rhubarb leafs, but I would want something with a waxy surface and then remove the wax with a solvent.  That might suit air filled
greenhouses.


But if you could have water filled greenhouses, perhaps like iin my previous post;
Even better if possible, I believe that Elodea was originally a terrestrial plant before adapting to fresh water.  I suggest that it might be possible to get it to regress to some degree where it provides plant fiber, celulose.  I am thinking of genetic engineering of course.

A upgrade wasp printer might be good for fiberglass, if you can make that.

#8843 Re: Terraformation » Impractical way to cool Venusian Atmosphere. » 2014-10-17 14:02:36

I don't know how stable it would be, but could you build a thin vacuum filled shell world in the L1 zone?

It would not provide as much shade as a comet plume and comet, but it would require less mass shifting.  Materials could come from Venus crossing asteroids captured or Mercury.

You would have a very large vacuum filled shell upon which you could attach solar arrays.  The interior would have some protection from thermal variables, and would have some protection from micrometeorites. 

The volume could contain processing facilities and spinning habitats.

#8844 Re: Life support systems » Greenhouse - hydroponics vs soil » 2014-10-17 08:45:01

I will present this as well as I can.  I do understand that like all systems it will be subject to degrading over time and exposure to the elements.

Knowing that I can already think of concerns.  However the first step is to conceive of doing something and then hope to do it much better.

Plastics have already been considered for greenhouse construction, and water has also been mentioned.  To that I will add clear or translucent oils.

I don't see this as a "First" greenhouse option, (But it could be considered), but as a potentially highly expandable greenhouse which may be well adapted to some locations on Mars, and which would require no glass, and very little metals.

The plan calls for a trench in the soil of Mars,

Within that place a large long plastic bubble made of a suitable type of plastic.  It will not have to put up with extreme temperature changes and will not as a rule be exposed to U.V. wavelengths.
This balloon is to be filled with water.

Above that place smaller long balloons of plastic crossways.
These balloons will be filled with water or oil.

If oil, then they can serve as reserve fuel tanks for a future need.  Perhaps a global dust storm.
Otherwise they are to serve as a transparent to translucent insulating window.  Performing the function of blubber for a whale.

Above those cross member balloons, place a plastic tarp specifically to block UV light and to serve as a sacrifice layer for abrasive dust.  It will be changed out periodically as needed.  It will be subjected to temperature extremes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lethbridge

This device upgraded with modern methods:
http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=7124

See posts 2014-10-04 16:42:02 & 2014-10-06 03:25:05

I suggest a combination arm method where at the upper arms would be a triple seal.  A simple representation of that would be you are in a bag suit, but your arms are in counter pressure apparatus.  Around the transition point on the upper arms you have a cork stopper (This is for visualization only, I would expect something much more sophisticated).
Your long term suit is a box on a robot arm, it has ports for the arms that the "Corks" can be pushed into for a seal.  So your arms (Or I prefer your best arm only) are outside of the box.  But this is not so stupid if you also put a bag suit for the arms on the outside also joined.  So your arms are in a pressurized bag suit and also inside of counter pressure suiting for the arm.  Then unfortunately your circulation will be cut off if you don't depressurize the arm bags.  So you do depressurize them  You pump the air from these arm bags into the box you are in.  Now you have your counter pressure protected arms in a vacuum. 
There is an inconvenience involved, certainly you now have both the counter pressure arm covering and the depressurized bags around the arms, to impede your sense of touch and your grip.  But you are not fighting to clench your hands against the pressure of a bag suit. During work with your arm(s) deployed, you are in the bag suit protected by it, and you are also having your arms protected by the counter pressure measures.  You are also protected by the box and the bag arm/gloves.  So you have double pressure protection.
Arm retraction:
In an emergency it might be possible to pull the cork out pull your arm into the box, if the cork were designed well.  Then you would have to hope the arm/bag did not burst from sudden pressurization.  However the ports that you put your arm through could also have hinged spring loaded doors that would shut.  I even if the box depressurized, you would still be in your hybrid bag suit and it might keep you alive.
But for normal arm retraction you would simply re-pressurize the arm bags, and pull your arm(s) out, and the port doors would spring shut.  (The arm/glove bags should still protect the pressurization of the box even if the doors fail.

So, I contemplate a long canal like structure where sunlight enters through the layers.  A partial counter pressure of water and (water or oil).
If it is entirely water, then the typical maximum temperature at 39 Degrees Fahrenheit / 3.88889 Degrees Centigrade.
If the cross member balloons are oil filled, then higher temperatures are possible.
The special suit would allow a person to function in such an environment, being basically a submarine with arm ports.
There will have to be a hydrocarbon industry on Mars, so this can fit in.  There is also sufficient water.
If the system were to overheat, then you can simply pull a partial vacuum on some of the water and draw out vapors to be compressed into usable water.
The plants which could be grown might be microscopic, or arctic pond plants, or with higher temperatures perhaps Elodea or other warmer water pond plants.
This would fit in with your plans for personal cleaning with water, not T.P.
It would be useful in the support of large communities, where what I suggested previously for personal hygiene involving freezing and T.P. substitute would be suitable for outposts.

#8845 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Martian Exports » 2014-10-16 17:11:33

If the fusion power becomes real, I have to agree with your thinking for sure Louis.

#8846 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Martian Exports » 2014-10-15 17:39:41

I guess I might support the idea of exports to Earth if it is true that a fusion method could power a space ship.  Mars having deuterium-tritium (The tritium would have to come from Lithium Salts?)

In that case you might not care about a little radiation resulting since you are in space.  That would perhaps change the game a lot.

#8847 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Martian Exports » 2014-10-15 16:25:00

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science- … ed-n226641

WASHINGTON — Lockheed Martin Corp said Wednesday that it had made a technological breakthrough in developing a power source based on nuclear fusion, and the first reactors, small enough to fit on the back of a truck, could be ready for use in a decade. Tom McGuire, who heads the project, said a small team had been working on fusion energy at Lockheed's secretive Skunk Works for about four years, but were going public to find potential partners in industry and government.

Initial work demonstrated the feasibility of a 100-megawatt reactor seven feet by 10 feet, which is about 10 times smaller than current reactors, McGuire said. The company said it would build and test a compact fusion reactor in less than a year and build a prototype in five years. Success would mark a breakthrough in a promising field that has not yet yielded viable power systems. Compact nuclear fusion would produce far less waste than coal-powered plants since it would use deuterium-tritium fuel, which can generate nearly 10 million times more energy than the same amount of fossil fuels, the company said. Lockheed said future reactors could use a different fuel and eliminate radioactive waste completely.

That would change things.

If you can do that, then you can do a lot of things, no need for exposure to the outside environment with solar pannels.

Just have enclosures on the bottom of an ice covered body of water neer the poles, melt polar ice to keep you body of water inflated with water.  Buildings underwater with counter pressure to hold the air in.   Emit greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere, and wait for the surface to warm up, then move more to the surface.

Have underwater lighting from it, make chemicals to dump into the water (Hydrogen & Oxygen)  pump in a limited amount of CO2, and you have a ecosystem.


Maybe you could export stuff, but actually, you might consider importing retired people.  Not many would go, but some would, and if they had pensions, SSI, nest eggs, then they bring capitol.

In the early days, you would not want that many children born anyway.  Retired people could often still do some type of work, monitor automated systems with computers, light duty things.
There would likely be a small subset which would want to do this.  But at first your colony would be small anyway so you would not want too many.

#8848 Science, Technology, and Astronomy » volcanoes-on-moon-dinosaur » 2014-10-14 14:00:50

Void
Replies: 1

http://www.space.com/27424-volcanoes-on … r-age.html

This along with the evidence of volcanism on Mars not that long ago, and perhaps the ocean on Enceladous, suggest to me that either objects do not cool off as fast as previous science suggested, or there is/are other energy inputs other than object condensation and radioactive decay.

Perhaps excitation from the solar wind, or currents generated elsewise, perhaps by photons.

#8849 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Ion Electrospray Propulsion System for CubeSats » 2014-10-13 13:47:45

I really think I am outliving my worth on this site, but in the absence of other replies, I will simply say I like your attitude.

But it is beyond my level.  I will spare others the need to educate me on that.

I had tried to think of a method of a DC magnetic field where magnetic particles would drop into it.  The field might drop into it and before loosing momentum by passing back up the other side of the field, they would become non magnetic.

That might be done by burning them in Oxygen.  But I just can't fathom the counter reactions, what happens to the magnetism, passing the Curie point, and also becoming a different molecule?

The field might be pumped up by pushing electricity though a existing plasma bubble?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 … 131156.htm

But that might blow the plasma bubble apart?  Or would it compress it?

Anyway, that one went back into the abyss of my mind, and just not drawn to it.  Probably won't be.  Think I am going to retire my mind before I damage it trying to do heavy lifting.

What's this going to do with previous dialog?  Well, I thought of a combination, but that's not looking clear to me just now.

The common desire, of course is to push mass out of a ship with as much energy as possible, and go like a bat out of hell.

But I only have fallow fields and sawdust in my coconut just now.

With that I withdraw. 

My brain is full smile

#8850 Re: Human missions » Phobos First » 2014-10-07 08:03:04

One thing I think the device could be useful for early and perhaps aid in a push to Mars would be an Earth/Moon local factory utilizing captured small asteroids, which is what NASA is intending to demonstrate, and some space companies are proposing to do as well.

I have for quite a time been in favor of a small shell world, even before I was aware of other thinking on shell worlds.  Those ideas are currently very well out of reach for actually doing, but this one is not so unrealistic.

I intend for a metal shell world, not a very thick wall either.

It is to serve several useful purposes.

It can hold solid objects that are manipulators, and solid objects that are to be manipulated.

It can hold devices like the Parent/Child devices we have spoken of, the third kind of spacesuit.

It will protect them from drifting away.  Nuts, bolts, tools, etc.

It is also a micrometeorite protection.

You can mount solar cell panels on the outside of it.

You can have a door on it so you can bring small asteroids into it.

You might have several chambers.  For instance if it were a cylinder, you could partition off each end, and have a baton type centrifuge such as you champion GWJohnson, one on each end.  That device if designed to simulate .38 Gee maximum, would test human adaptation to that, and on it's smaller radius floors, simulations of gravitation for various smaller solar system objects could occur.  And of course having a prototype would allow the bugs to be worked out for when it was used for an actual mission to Mars.

Ideally all the shell chambers could hold molecular pressure, but not viscous pressurization.  Every air locks leaks, and various industrial processes will shed volatile substances.  If you hold them in the shell, then you can try to build a collector, and recycle them.  For my part I would attempt to use a bottle with a high static electric charge inside of it relative to the rest of the place.  The intention is that will cause molecules to collect upon it's outer surface.  Then I would try to use a piezoelectric pump to compress that skin of collected molecules into a pipette.  Applying an electric force onto the crystal to make it oscillate making a plunger like situation which could push that skin of molecules into a funnel.  Very tiny.

Lets call end chambers 1 & 2.  And then there would be an middle large chamber to this shell world.  You could put a double wall in place in certain places, perhaps you would not do that where the large door would be that you bring small space rocks (Asteroids) into, but otherwise you would have a double wall.  The purpose is so that you can pinion the child devices, this 3rd type of space suit between walls.  You could then electrify one wall as negative and positive, one each.  Then you have a power buss, and can place machines into the gap between walls, and this would be your factory floor.  Then you could actually have spacesuit type 3 (With the arm ports), in this location as well, to navigate through hallways between machines.  Then you could have tires, that contact each wall, hold the device steady, power the suit, and propel the suit to locations where the human augmented arms can manipulate machinery.  In this case, I could recommend a disk shaped suit as one option but there would be many other configurations.  The suit should be able to move in any direction within the space between the two walls, and should be able to spin on their axis, providing quite a lot of ability to reach valves, junction boxes, ovens, pressure vessels, robotic arms, and other devices.

If this option was done.  Then why can't you also do it at Mars?

But you would not have to before you set up a colony on Mars.  The financial output from a factory such as this might pay for most of the development costs, for devices which could also be quite a bit of what is needed for hardware to access Mars, and to provide propellant.

From such a Shell world factory could come the projection of humans to various places in the solar system, including the Moon after a while.  Mars of course, and since Phobos is the theme of this thread, I will mention it as well.

  1. Index
  2. » Search
  3. » Posts by Void

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB