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

#9151 Re: Terraformation » Shell Worlds » 2013-10-13 07:33:22

Well Terraformer, you got me smile

My coarse adjustment is off to a dangerous limit, so to respond to human limitations, the band of atmospheric column usable is constricted with the hardware I suggested, on the issue of pressure.

On the issue of temperature, it is less constricted over time, if you allow for a cooling process (I originally said no atmospheric change except the acid characteristic).

The heat of Venus is solar and internal heat.  I do not expect that the internal core generated heat can keep Venus hot.  The shells would both shade and insulate the hot atmosphere below.  But I did suggest openings where aircraft could pass through, and they could also provide ventilation. 

Further if there were ventilation ports, some where cold air poured down, and some where hot air displaced by the sinking cold air could pass upward, then turbines could harness this air flow.

A changing temperature profile for the atmospheric column, however would also change the buoyancy at a altitude, so the Floating Shells would require adjustment for that.  Either flexible hinges built in, or special compensations like ballast adjustments.

Karov, has bypassed and modified my suggestion with a counter suggestion, which as usual is much more ambitious, and also very interesting.

I guess the obvious common point is where typically Venus terraformation plans abhor the thick atmosphere and try to get rid of it, or in the case of floating cities try to live with it, in these plans, harmonization with it provides a greater potential yield of dwelling surface area.

By the way, in the future, if I do not respond in a timely manner to posts, and that seems rude, it can be because quite often when I try to access this site I get a warning of a malicious content.  (It appears to be some type of identity probe).

Karov,

So, how would your method work for Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune?  (Roughly 1 + some value g)

#9152 Re: Terraformation » Shell Worlds » 2013-10-12 10:00:30

I was stimulated by posting in the topic "Supra-Polar "Continents" on Earth.  But, since I am going to make a deviation from both that and the typical shell worlds so far described (To my knowledge), I will place a post here.

Venus is my target for this, and worlds like Venus, if any elsewhere.

I am thinking of floating shells actually, but many layers. None of them will have vacuum above them.  Each shell could have open ports to allow aircraft through.

I am not thinking of altering the atmosphere beyond getting rid of the Acid vapors and aerosols.

To float each shell would have a Nitrogen/Oxygen atmosphere inside of it (Each "Shell" being at least a double shell).

So if the temperatures of the Venus atmosphere were kept constant as they are (Although that is not a mandate), the portion of atmospheric column suitable for habitation, (Where the pressure inside the double shell was quite close to the pressure outside of the double shell), would be from about 12 feet of water to 200 feet?
1/3 bar to about 6 bar with a Nitrogen/Oxygen mix. 

Deeper shells would be possible using Helium/Oxygen, but I don't know how suitable that is for humans long term. Not very I would think.

Making the shells float might actually require a Helium/Oxygen mix on the upper end, towards 1/3 bar also due to need for more buoyancy from a thinner atmosphere.

The top shell would have natural lighting, but the others would mostly require artificial lighting like normal shell worlds.

I think this would possibly evolve from small floating habitats anyway if they ever are established in the first place.  But it is an interesting supplement to the notion of creating multiple layers of "Land" on one world.  It is also convenient that Venus has a significant gravitational field not too different from Earths.

#9153 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Cyclers » 2013-10-11 15:02:07

quote:

With regards to your classification of people into two different groups, I contend that your theory has no predictive power; that it has no evidence in reality; and finally that it is simply incorrect.

We havn't tested it, and you have not provided contrary evidence, so your contention is equivalent to my opinion.  I might argue with you on it, but it was simply injected as opinion by me and you are welcome to reject or criticize it.  I do have propposed evidence, but this thread is about cyclers.  That section on human nature (As I see it), and the politcal aspects that it drives, was connected to my opinion that other options should be considered to get around it.

#9154 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Cyclers » 2013-10-11 14:45:43

quote:

To be clear: Fusion is not really very close right now.  Recent NIF results to the contrary, breakeven has never been accomplished in any non-fission based test of nuclear explosive capacity.  Even if fusion facilities did reach conditions of breakeven, their masses and low specific powers make them prohibitively large for use in any space application.

Well hello Josh.  Thanks for responding.

Before I continue, I will have to whine just a bit.  I placed a similar post on the topic of Fusion, at the same time I did this one (Very close in time).
I will observe the Rusakov, GW Johnson, Terraformer, Louis and myself have made posts there.  I am wondering why you do not also pour cold water on their posts.  Cold water is not all bad though.  A little slap up to reality is valuable from time to time.  You were perhaps merely stating observed facts.

That article was rather positive, the one with the metal rings.  I rather like the concept.  Rather than worrying about burning the containment vessel, they simply make the lining replacable, burn it and the burned material would propell the rocket.  How real are they?  They say it is in reach.  Break even, or break over?  How should I know.  Are you a nuclear expert?  I am not being rude, I really am wondering if you work in the field.

On this I will make another point, that the point of my post was to see if someone could have thinking on what fusion propulsion (If it ever exists), would do for the notion of cyclers.  As cyclers are way in the future, and fusion may also be way in the future, I felt it was a reasonable question.

Even if a fusion rocket could exist and get people to Mars in 3 Months, if a advance space civilization formed, it might still be prefferable to transport, or house permanently people in such habitats, in a manner where the majority were inhabitants, but a few transfered to other places.  They would not be cooped up in a tin can, and could work a job or recreate during much of the journey.

But it may be that other surprises would render this as not preferable.  It is entertaining to think about it.

"

#9155 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Cyclers » 2013-10-11 10:47:15

I am thinking that adding fusion propulsion to the mix might change the game with cycling spaceships.

http://www.space.com/23084-mars-explora … ocket.html

"We're in the lab, we're building the coils, we're showing the scaling and we'll be producing the neutrons within the next year to show that fusion is occurring, and it's occurring at the scales required to build a fusion-driven rocket," Pancotti said.

So, if they actually show progress as claimed, I am excited about the claims for a Mars expidition, probabbly not involving any type of cycling spaceship/cycling hardware, but I am also thinking that this could change the game for cycling spaceships.

I think the since using such a rocket to transfer to an from cyclers involves much shorter trip times that an expidition to Mars, and since technically at least to a degree your rocket can be resupplied and serviced at each end of the trip, the weight constraints would be much relaxed, and such a transfer ship could have a great deal of redundancy in it's systems, which would help aleviate the issue where if you had a propulsion failure, the crew might be in great danger.

Further, I think that in a well devoloped system of habitats, it might be possible to have rescue ships to help in such a situation, similar to the coast gaurd.

So freight could travel in spiral orbits using Ion, or solar propulsions.  And populations could be transfered in relative comfort using cyclers, and fusion rockets.

I believe that Mr. Aldrin had also suggested an actual cycler that could go into parking orbit around Mars at times.  With fusion power perhaps that might make sense, where with chemical propulsion it is much more diffacult to support.

Fusion propulsion on the cyclers, might also make it easier to line up for a gravity assist from a flyby of a planet.

#9156 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Fusion propulsion crowdfunding » 2013-10-11 10:37:21

I am joining this conversation with a related article attached.

http://www.space.com/23084-mars-explora … ocket.html

"We're in the lab, we're building the coils, we're showing the scaling and we'll be producing the neutrons within the next year to show that fusion is occurring, and it's occurring at the scales required to build a fusion-driven rocket," Pancotti said.

So, if they actually show progress as claimed, I am excited about the claims for a Mars expidition, probabbly not involving any type of cycling spaceship/cycling hardware, but I am also thinking that this could change the game for cycling spaceships. I will post the rest of what I have to say under that topic.

#9157 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Fusion propulsion crowdfunding » 2013-10-10 08:21:24

This is a related article I think:
http://www.space.com/23084-mars-explora … ocket.html

So, if it proves true for a Mars expidition, that's wonderful.
That would be suitable for the present condition, where the solar system population is centralized on Earth, and there are no habitates of siginificance elsewhere.  It is nice to have a 7 month expidition possibility.

But it would be even nicer later, to spend the outbound trip time in a much upgraded environment such as could be provided by a cycling spaceship.

I think that in the future when there would be a distribution of population off Earth, the above mentioned fusion driven space travel would also be suitable for use with cycling spaceships.

In that use the extra power it would have (If it works), would allow redundant backups in the ships, and so the danger where a malfunction in transfer to and from a cycling spaceship would be reduced.  Further, it would also be likely that a device like this would enable rescue ships to be available in the case where a transfer did fail, and a group of passengers were at risk of death.  Something like the coast gaurd.

#9158 Re: Terraformation » Areoforming Mercury » 2013-10-09 10:18:09

In that distant future, I would also wonder if progress with understanding, and maybe even manipulating dark matter and dark energy would provide an energy source.

#9159 Re: Life support systems » Synthetic Gravity on the Moon to simulate gravity on Mars. » 2013-10-02 14:08:45

I will work on that.  Thanks.

I will be off screen for the most part for a number of days, going up towards the Canadian border, to hike, fish, and get cold and wet.

#9160 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Falcon 9R Launch » 2013-09-30 09:57:58

At the risk of being redundant:
http://www.space.com/22996-spacex-launc … light.html

If they got test data, then they got something.

The article also seems to claim some engine performance improvement in a Vacuum.

#9161 Re: Life support systems » Synthetic Gravity on the Moon to simulate gravity on Mars. » 2013-09-30 08:07:20

As for artificial gravity items on the moon,  why not just build a Frisbee-shaped partly-or-wholly-buried stationary pressure vessel of a building,  and set spinning concentric rings within it,  angled for a proper sense of down perpendicular to the floor.  We already know how to build non-spinning buildings,  and the rings are rather similar to escalators or moving sidewalks.  Why spin the whole building if you don't have to?  That's really hard to do if you are not in free-fall.

I agree.  Good plan in my opinion, makes it even better, and maybe access to non-spinning habit areas through a port at the center "Hub".

But I think a Model-T first, and then a luxury vehicle.

Should this happen, and the Moon become economically connected to general human economic and scientific interests, then the Moon might end up populated.

Each news item I see about the Moon lately improves on the previously suggested nature of the Moon "Bone Dry".

First Polar deposites of useful chemicals, and now Magmatic Water.

#9162 Re: Life support systems » Synthetic Gravity on the Moon to simulate gravity on Mars. » 2013-09-27 09:40:29

GW Johnson.  Thanks for replying.  Your always a gentileman.

Other factors would have to be considered, to make the judgement on that, and putting it on the Moon may or may not be the best payoff.

I would hope that the containing torus could be constructed from lunar materials, with a laser printing process, and then soil bearing down on it with gravity induced compression would make it capable of containing a compressed atmosphere.  Additional strength could be added by wrapping the basically ceramic torus with a strong fiber material.

In other words I do not verify that a relatively convenient build process could occur on the Moon, but I do want to explore the possibility.

As for the "Train Cars" that would ride in the torus, yes, it seems likely that they might mostly have to be provided from Earth, at least until an "Industrial Civilization" was present on the Moon.
However they might be relatively light weight like aircraft, as if I calculated right going 22 mph is not an outragous thing for a machine to do.

You are correct that a torus in orbit with spokes has advantages as you mentioned them.

However if this device were done it could have pressurized spokes as well, but you would have to stop the "Train" periodically to get on and off of it, but subways are much the same in that respect.

The attraction I see, is that all of your mines, processing plants, and people would be able to interact in the moons low gravity field, Mars simulation could be tested, no rockets, mass-drivers needed, (Except to transport people and specialized machines).  Radiation protection possible.  Once you had a setup, it could be a source of fuel and machines to support activities in places other than the Moon.

I certainly hope that private organizations and government organizations will try to go to Mars, but if that does not happen, at least the Moon might not be dismissed with the same arguments.

The Moon is actually a very big place, having the surface area similar to North and South America combined.

Some private orgainzations already want to go there and do things, and moving people on and off of the moon by rocket to conserve their health will be expensive also, and may also promote fatalities.

Learning to stay there permanently (Maybe) is worth a look I think.

#9163 Life support systems » Synthetic Gravity on the Moon to simulate gravity on Mars. » 2013-09-26 18:45:28

Void
Replies: 6

I see an oportunity to use the Moon as both a place to simulate Mars gravity issues, and to also make the Moon more suitable to support human efforts to connect with Mars.

I did notice other peoples work, and with a bit of combining, I speculate that something like this might work.

From Elon Musk:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa … -1.1466597

From the Treckies:
http://www.buildtheenterprise.org/gravity-wheel

Related to the Treckies notions, and a really neet site I think:
http://www.artificial-gravity.com/sw/SpinCalc/

I made my own stab at it.  Pin me down or correct me as you may wish, but:
To add 1/6 synthetic g to the existing lunar force of 1/6 g = an approximate simulation of Mars gravity.

1/6=0.167

192.65897339179904  Feet
1.5947325297807915  Rotations per minute
21.936851288475303  Miles per hour
.167                g


So could a torroidal tube burried under soil shielding traveling at 22 MPH provide 1/6 g?

I would expect it to be pressurized and to use something like the hyperloop vehicle.

Doing that would provide information on human, plant, and animal reactions to 1/3 g.

If humans did well with that then also the Moon would be made more habitible, and more suitable for industrilization.

That could make it a better support for efforts towards Mars.

#9164 Re: Terraformation » Re-starting the Martian core » 2013-09-26 17:09:14

Since Volcanism is a related subject:

http://phys.org/news/2013-09-duo-early- … nnels.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanolog … h_and_Mars

Current volcanism[edit source | edit]
HiRISE image of possible rootless cones east of Elysium region. The chains of rings are interpreted to be caused by steam explosions when lava moved over ground that was rich in water ice.
"Rootless Cones" on Mars - due to lava flows interacting with water (MRO, January 4, 2013) ( WikiMiniAtlas
21°57′54″N 197°48′25″E / 21.965°N 197.807°E / 21.965; 197.807).Scientists have never recorded an active volcano eruption on the surface of Mars;[48] however, the European Space Agency's Mars Express orbiter photographed lava flows that must have occurred within the past two million years, suggesting a relatively recent geologic activity.[49]

I am not expert in this at all.

However, I have tried to reason that one reason Mars does not behave like Earth with plates and subduction is that Mars may have a very thick layer of light materials over the heavier materials, and convection is inhibited by that.  It must have the full spectrum of materials, but less of the heavy materials by volume.

What is favorable about that if it were true would be that Mars would have lost less heat than would be expected in that case. The idea that their could have been volcanism in the last 2 million years might support that notion, since perviously it was not thought that Mars could have recent volcanism.

I did read an article by some scientist, from Japan I think were he put forth the idea that Mars is just now starting to form plates.  On the other hand recent discoveries of rocks similar to Earth minerals, suggests that it behaved like Earth in the past.

I read in the past that it is thought that the Moon at times had a magnetic field, because a large object had caused its outer shell to spin at a rate different than it's then liquid core.  The article seemed to say that such a situation could persist for a million years or so.

So, it could be considered to slam a volcano sideways, with a space object, hopiing to induce such an effect, and maybe even breaking open a magma pocket as well, if there were one.  (And generating effects of atmosphere loss/gain as a possible side effect).

#9165 Water on Mars » mars-water-discovery-curiosity-rover » 2013-09-26 16:52:31

Void
Replies: 34

http://www.space.com/22949-mars-water-d … rover.html

http://phys.org/news/2013-09-mars-rover … lanet.html

2% of soil perhaps,  but also perchlorate which they say is a problem.

Perhaps finding a use for perchlorate could improve the equasion.

I am supprised no-one jumped on the article.  I was not going to bother thinking they would.

#9166 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Cyclers » 2013-09-24 10:11:34

I see a changing of objective to be essential to the purpose of humans accessing space.  Having the focus solely on Mars fatally damages that objective, for a variety of reasons.
Among those are that there are others who are interested in Non-Mars space objectives.  Even though Non-Mars, the tools needed to achieve those Non-Mars goals in many cases would be useful also for Mars objectives.
Another human problem is the contrast between Ear-Mouth people and Eye-Hand people. 
There are two basic human functions.  One is used primarily to manipulate people.  One is used primarily to manipulate physical objects.  Each has it’s value, and cannot be dispensed of entirely.  In my opinion the sad course of human civilization is that the Ear-Mouth heritage eventually subjugates and displaces the Eye-Hand heritage, at which point a civilization becomes degenerate and impoverished, and vulnerable to exterior conquest.  That (Exterior conquest by Eye-Hand People),  I suppose is a potential  last resort to reset the situation, but in our present situation, the weapons which could be employed for such a reset are potentially very dangerous, to the point of ending the potential for human ascendancy, and perhaps even an end to humans entirely.
This site is at a logical impasse, since the sponsors are more interested in the potential for life on Mars (Which I also think also is important).
They come in two polar variations in my opinion, some are interested in life on Mars from a scientific objective to understand the history and current reality of life in the universe, and some have a political desire to dispute the existence of the spiritual.  That later item is political in nature, and tied to the Ear-Mouth people trying to get a free lunch, and to subjugate and replace the Eye-Hand people.  They instinctively wish for freedom from moral behavior, which translates into the genetic and cultural subjugation and elimination of Eye-Hand people.
I mentioned the potential of a violent reset, but there also exists the potential for a frontier expansion.  The Ear-Mouth people have provided two impediments to this that I can think of that are obvious.  The first was the outer space treaty. 
How can the Ear-Mouth’s extract material benefit from the Eye-Hands, if they cannot hold them at a location where a vertical hierarchy can be imposed?  While that treaty’s sponsors would not all have had bad intentions, the effect was to deliver ownership of places beyond the Earth to the  international Ear-Mouth process.
The other method brought forward has been the protection of alien life potentials off Earth.  This originally applied to Mars, but could very likely be extended in a tenuous fashion to many other places.  Europa for instance or other places with potential environments which may be presumed to support life.
This could even be extended to the Moon, for the reason that rocks ejected by impacts of the Earth might hold fossil records of life from era’s billions of years ago.
Similarly, some asteroids and the Dwarf planet Ceres could be declared off limits.
So, it may be necessary to invoke a horizontal Frontier Eye-Hand process to counter the Ear-Mouth process.  This should take the path of least resistance from the Ear-Mouths. 
Overcoming the desire of the Ear-Mouths to exploit a controlled population is one objective, (Bypassing dark ages I would hope). 
The other is to identify what objectives can be practical to manipulate physically by the Eye-Hand process.  That is in flux, as there are many new proposed machines, and machines which are under development.  We cannot define with any certainty what future of propulsion systems will dominate the process.  We cannot either understand with certainty what methods of manipulation of physical objects will be the most effective.
Therefore specialization should be avoided, and a generalist posture should be taken to evolve the Eye-Hand culture.
For this reason I support the continued consideration of cycling spaceships along with other processes under consideration.
I have been considering rings of cycling space habitats in relatively circular solar orbits in concert with cycling space habitats in elliptical orbits.
If the Earths orbital period (Year) were considered as represented by the number ‘1’, then I propose rings with the periods of;
.24 (Near Mercury);
.62 (Near Venus);
.94 (Near Earth);
1.88 (Near Mars, and not too far away from the relatively circular orbits of the objects in the asteroid belt).
The above are rough numbers, (Don’t do the finishing work, and then build the house, that’s how the Ear-Mouths do things/Never get things done/Trash the object manipulation process/Take the goods).
Materials for such habitats could come from the Moon, or elliptical asteroids, Phobos, Demos, and perhaps the circular asteroids of the belt, and perhaps even Mercury.
I would see habitats as not needing to be huge in the circular rings, perhaps 1000 persons per habitat, more or less.  They could  function in a manner where 2 or more would be joined periodically.  The force to manipulate their relative orbits (Locations) would be from the sun, either photon sailing, or sailing on the solar wind itself.  This would insure that the rings would each function as a society with material and population interchanges.  The habitats of the rings would also be able to synchronize with the elliptical orbiting habitats, insuring that at both the high and low end of each elliptical orbit, some habitat would be located to do an interchange with.
In addition to such abrupt interchanges there could be space ships which could ride below each ring, in a mostly circular orbit, to provide transportation, also using solar force as propulsion.
Beyond that would be spiral orbit ships which could use solar or ion or any other efficient and effective method to transfer goods between circular habitats, elliptical habitats, and planets, dwarf planet (Ceres), and asteroids.  These most likely would be robotic.
I have written this to leave open for thought the potential of cycling devices, but not to disrupt any other considered process, such as an expedition to Mars (If you really think you won’t be stopped).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In general I am not sure that an elliptical cycling spaceship would have strong value for an early expedition to Mars, but I will make a trial proposal anyway.
Suppose you did create such a device, and it had only the functions of radiation shielding and centrifugal gravitation substitution, and perhaps some other assets for survival such as communication gear, and some solar power.  Obviously, it might have more pressurized volume than the expedition ship, so as to psychologically provide some relief to the space travelers.
I can speculate on a mission where that being robotically placed in an orbit, would provide a temporary location for a space expedition to ride, a camping place more or less.  The actual expedition ship would have minimal mass, and the people riding on it would  then get out of shape over a period of weeks or months, and would arrive to it, and would be reconditioned and protected during a segment of travel.  Then they would launch from it with their minimal ship, if safety conditions were good, and go to Mars.  Although this could be in a circular solar orbit, it seems more practical that it would be in an elliptical orbit phased so as to be most convenient to the process of moving people from Earth to Mars.  A return process would be needed as well, if they did not intend to stay on Mars permanently.  They might arrive on Mars in relatively better physical condition, then if they tried to go all the way without reconditioning.  This notion of course would not be the most energy and mass efficient method, but, delivering weak and sick people to Mars would not be of much value, a wasted effort in fact, no matter how Buck Rogers your expedition was.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another variation would be where the cycler robotically was poised in an elliptical orbit where orbital energy was provided by some relatively efficient means not usually considered for human missions, and where that orbit intersected Mars at a future point, and as a one time event, the human piloted craft intersected it after a few months, and joined with it.  Then that joined expedition would enter Mars orbit on a permanent basis, providing a space station with centrifuge and shielding in orbit.  In that case, the cycler would have a Periapsis much higher than Earth orbit and a Apoapsis which intersects with Mars.
The human carrier could intersect with the cycler at Periapsis or some time after, or even nearer  to Apoapsis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apsis
If you paste a non-response, non-reply jump over on top of this post I will consider that you may be a Ear-Mouth person 

#9167 Meta New Mars » My anti-virus says this web site has a know threat on it. » 2013-08-25 21:57:04

Void
Replies: 0

It used to say so if I even tried to look,  now it only did so when I saved a post.  It asks me if I want to ignore it, and I always say no, and then I get taken away from this site.  FYI.

#9168 Re: Human missions » Glass » 2013-08-25 21:51:07

I am interested.  Does anyone have an opinion on the dune materials of Mars?

Information I have so far originally suggested that the dunes were of Basalt, and would be chemically unstable in the presence of Oxygen and water.

However, material obtained lately suggests sand like Earth's, but finer grains.  I have also see descriptions such as glassy.

I understand that the higher latitude dunes have ices in their pore spaces, water, and perhaps CO2.

It is a bulk material, and perhaps at lower latitudes would be loose and not cemented by ices.  I suspect that not all dunes are alike chemically, but similar.

What I am after involves 3D printing of very large structures.  To visualize it simply, I would propose a cubic structure, where a printing robot melts grains of dune material on the flat surface of the top, in successive layers.  I choose this, because I hope that the machine would be able to perform it's work largely unsupervised, and would likely do so when solar power was significantly available.  It would leave "Caves" inside of the structure which would be filled with packed but not "Sintered" dune material.  Later an extraction process, likely involving humans and machines would empty these cavities.

I can think of two uses for such a structure.  Building a Martian analog of a high rise building (But with very thick walls), or a C02 condenser.

As a habitat, I think I do not have to elaborate much.  Metal airlocks would likely be fitted into well formed structure in the "Cubic Stone".  Whatever else needed.

As a condenser, I believe that the block would achieve stable temperature suitable to condense CO2 in it's interior, as a solid.  Shading would also help, but at higher latitudes would not be needed.  I also have been reading dialog here, I think that a pump raising the pressure of the Martian air mix inside would assist in the condensation process.  Of course if it would work that way, it would also yield a mix of non-condensed gasses, which may also have some value.

I do not contemplate transparent glass.

Another problem to solve is to extract the dune material, and distribute it to the top of the cubic structure, and to spread it, so that the sintering robot could do it's work.

Other shapes than a cube would be available, but I chose a cube for ease of visualization, and also because it has a flat top, allowing such a robot to have a simplified environment to work in.

#9169 Re: Terraformation » Ionic wind ... » 2013-04-24 16:55:38

I can't resist one more post on that skyhook thing.

It has been observed that on Mars very large bubbles of gas get swept away from the top of the atmosphere.  This is apparently associated with some locations on Mars where fossil magnetic fields exist.

I would like to contemplate a "Sky Touch" system rather than a Sky Hook.

Maybe it could involve a magnetic field, static electric collectors, and perhaps ionic wicking.

If I understand the skyhook, it would spin in a direction contrary to the orbital motion in such a way that when an arm of it touched the atmosphere, it might encounter it with a reduced speed, and perhaps zero relative speed.

I am recalling that some space probes to Mars have grazed the Martian atmosphere to circularize their orbits.

So, it seems apparent that a arm reaching into the atmosphere could be protected from destructive forces not only by having a reduced relative speed, but simply by not going too deep.

If the highest atmosphere is ionized then there is a hope to alter it's momentum with a magnetic device.

Capacitors, being electrostatic devices could collect and compress the thin gas.

A wick using electrical force up and down the length of a tether, could cause a ionic current flow resulting in the gasses collected at the arm being conducted upwards to the hub, where further treatment for the purpose of tanking it might occur.

Of course each touch and collection would lower the orbit of the device, so it has to be boosted upwards in orbit to compensate.  For Earth this could be an interaction with the Earths magnetic field.  For Mars and certainly Venus, that process would not work, so an interaction with the solar wind might do the trick.

Putting all of that together into one machine might be a complex problems though, but if achieved, perhaps a worthy accomplishment.

I think I will rest for a time.

#9170 Re: Terraformation » Venus » 2013-04-24 16:42:50

I like that information as well.

I think that I am done on this thread for a while.  I think it was worthwhile for me.  I have a better understanding now.

#9171 Re: Terraformation » Venus » 2013-04-23 22:53:45

Natural CO2 lasers on Mars and Venus:
http://laserstars.org/history/mars.html

http://kategreene.net/?p=764

Anyway I looked that up after thinking about building lasers on the surface of Venus.

I am not sure how possible the notion is, but it is largely a CO2 atmosphere, so CO2 Laser.

The typical materials used for the mirrors may handle the temperatures OK.

Dealing with corrosion will be a problem.

I suppose I am thinking that since Venus is almost hot enough to glow in visible wavelengths, and CO2 Lasers are infrared, some of the needed requirements are met.

A use for it?  Maybe to refine metals?

Well actually I was wondering if they could point up, and with heat punch a hole in the clouds, or otherwise cause localized convection, with the hopes of altering the environment.

Perhaps dissipating a bit of heat to space, but perhaps more importantly if causing atmospheric convection, then causing hail or cold rains to then fall from clouds elevated to a higher region in the atmosphere.

Perhaps also maybe being a component in a scheme to alter the atmospheric chemistry, that being done perhaps along with adding some chemicals to the cloud mix.

Nothing definite, and no assurance that such lasers could be possible or could endure the environment, or do anything useful, but it is a different idea.

#9172 Re: Terraformation » Venus » 2013-04-23 17:03:59

Qraal01 made an excellent post yesterday with a link to a site with answers to that.

If I understood;
1) A greater rotation than Venus now has would be needed, to provide atmospheric isolation for the polar regions, so that the moisture of them would tend to stay there, and not humidify the lower latitude atmosphere.
2) A humidity of 1% in many cases could allow such a planet to be habitable even at a distance of .5 AU.

Beyond that we do not have convergence.  However that is quite a lot.

#9173 Re: Terraformation » Ionic wind ... » 2013-04-23 16:57:36

Hmmm... Yes, but that was assumed.

But one that works with atmospheric gasses, and can propel a small plane, which indicates significant wattage, that is of interest.

An adaptation that might work with atmospheric gasses in space for instance.

Various schemes, how about the one where a rotating tether in orbit scoops atmosphere up to orbit to fill the tanks?  Skyhooks having been considered by others, but why go all the way to the ground to pick up a fixed location object, when it would be easier to grab atmosphere.

And also the original content is of interest, since most planets don't have as good of an oxidizer for combustion as ours does.

Perhaps solar powered planes, or laser beam powered planes.

A line of related technologies for propulsion, not requiring noble gasses, or specifically manufactured fuel and oxidizer propellants.

I wonder how well an airship on Mars would work with the technology, particularly if it was solar powered, or Laser beam powered?

I do have significant background in electrical/electronics/Metrology/programming and so on, electrical machines are not alien to me, but I also do sometimes step into it anyway.

A friendly attitude is helpful for creativity, hostility shuts down the higher brain functions, and causes humans to revert to simple mammals or even reptiles.  Not the best mode of process, except for short term survival situations.

#9174 Re: Terraformation » Ionic wind ... » 2013-04-23 08:59:16

I have wondered if this could be converted into a space propulsion.  Of course you would need to bring the gasses with you where there is no atmosphere, but also I am thinking that those can be more normal gasses.

For instance for Mars, could you bring dry ice up from the surface as a propulsion gas?

Venus, extract it from a floating location in the atmosphere, and use it in orbit?

Could you exhaust water vapor from ice from ice worlds such as Ceres?

Could you reduce space rocks, and exhaust whatever gasses that produces?

The point of advantage, is that for Mars for instance for a mission, you do not have to capture Methane and Oxygen for a return trip to Earth, but Dry Ice.  Of course this may not work at all for getting it to orbit.  (Unless you used a high pressure CO2 steam rocket).

That might be a possible trick some day, high pressure steam of CO2 or Nitrogen to get to orbit, and then ionic propulsion somehow adapted to vacuum (I mention again, that the propulsion gas would have to be stored on the spacecraft).

#9175 Re: Terraformation » Venus » 2013-04-23 08:43:46

I defer to you on the spin, it is good to get the correct answer on that.  I will incorporate it.

Void wrote:
I had heard of these desert planets, but only the most vague reference to this point.

Is it reasonable to say that Sulfuric Acid along with such water vapor as is present, is one of the keys to the current high temperatures of Venus?

You wrote:
No. Clouds are a double edged sword in a sense, but the H2SO4 layers reflect heat away on current Venus more than they trap. The real problem is all that CO2 which enhances its own heat-trapping by pressure-broadening the spectral windows it absorbs best at.

CO2, at lower pressures, helps cool the very high atmosphere and trap in the water, keeping the planet wet. We want much lower CO2, but not too low. More importantly we don't want too much water, else a runaway Greenhouse will result from self-accelerating evaporation of the oceans.

I will continue to argue on this point because I think I have a responsibility to dispute it as an absolute.

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space … _and_winds

Please don't see this as a hostile rebuttal, rather as conflicting argument.

On the global scale, Venus’s climate is strongly driven by the most powerful greenhouse effect found in the Solar System. The greenhouse agents sustaining it are water vapour, carbon dioxide and sulphuric acid aerosols.

The point I am making is not for the purpose of disputing that it can be possible to remove CO2 by the means suggested in previous planning, but to say that indeed a significant portion of the greenhouse effect, (Even though less than the massive volume of CO2), is from the water vapor and the Sulfuric Acid content.

I do recall a very long time ago seeing a TV program where it was stated that the CO2 by itself cannot elevate the temperatures as high as they are, but that a combination of gasses is responsible for blocking wavelengths from radiating from the planet.

While I do not yet see how a removal of Sulfuric Acid and Water Vapor can be compatible with the organic method of removal of CO2 which is being discussed, each removal should help.  The trick would be to find a way.  Since Sulfuric Acid is often hostile to life, removal of it might help.

I still enjoy your contribution here to a very large degree.  I am very pleased to interact with you.

As for my credentials, I am only an enthusiast on the subject, and it is often a very tricky think to know when I should argue, or be silent, since I am inclined to believe that quite a few of the posters here are very well credentialed.

Perhaps some of my information is outdated, and now proven wrong, but I cannot update my facts without interaction.

I also note that habitation of the upper atmosphere by machines or humans would be more possible without the Sulfuric Acid, so it is a target I am interested in.

And to impede a summary dismissal of my prior post, I also re-ask the question:

If it is not possible to increase the spin of Venus after terraforming, and on the basis of the evidence you posted, rather than having open water at the poles of Venus, would it be possible to have enclosures for the moisture at the poles, strongly shaded to perhaps 5% of the solar flux, where habitat could be provided. 

The purpose would be to keep water vapor below 1% in the atmosphere of Venus, but elevated inside of the habitats.

Since the model for habitable desert worlds cannot include even an improved Venus with open water at the poles without increasing it's spin.

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

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB