From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.wa.com)
Date: Wed Feb 16 2000 - 20:18:10 MST
On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, James Swayze wrote:
> John Thomas wrote:
> A little off the subject but can someone explain to me why people promoting
> the terraforming of Mars still think it will hold a man made atmosphere
> despite the believed theory that it lost it's atmosphere in the first place
> due to it's diminutive size and thus lack of sufficient gravity?
Well the question is whether or not there is enough gas "frozen" or
locked up in minerals that can be freed to produce a usable atmosphere.
In the Mars case, I believe UV photodissociation causes the Hydrogen to
get lost to space (thats why Ozone is good). But you would have to
do some careful calculations to see what the loss rates are for N2,
O2, CO2, Ar, etc. Lots of stuff will react with the metals and get
sequestered. More will freeze out if the planet is cold (accelerating
anti-greenhouse if you can produce dry ice).
Planetary engineering is no easy task. I think the general "impression"
is that if they can generate enough gas to make an atmosphere, they
will figure out how to hold onto it after the fact.
> Don't get me wrong I want us to go there and I feel we could live there.
Why would you want to live at the bottom of a gravity well?!?
And do you have a defense against descending nanobots hell-bent
on dismantling your planet and using it for computronium???
Actually though, once Mercury & Venus are harvested, you probably
want to just sift through Mars, pull out the Carbon and Silicon and
leave behind a cold hard hunk of rusty iron... Hope you enjoy your new home.
> I believe, though, we can only live there under a man made roof to hold
> in the atmosphere.
*"We"*, thou doth invokest the global "we", seeming to imply that
I seekest to live on that cold dry windy planet with you!?!
I would sooner drink rhubarb wine than live beside a neighbor
whose thoughts seem to run no deeper than the water running down
my windows (I'm in Seattle remember)...
Seriously (Oh, Oh, how I hate to do that....), this is discussed in
papers regarding uses of Nanotechnology for Terraforming.
See: "Terraforming with Nanotechnology", Journal of the
British Interplanetary Society, V. 47:311-318 (1994).
Headlines read: "Nanobot Wars On Mars... As one group of nanobots
attempts to seal in the newly created atmosphere, another group
of nanobots keeps launching high speed ingots of Silicon Carbide
that keep punching holes in the atmospheric sealant canopy.
Mars Direct stock fell 14% on rumors that the judges in the
Solar System courts are being replaced by Computronium4Us
AI-judges designed with a concept of self-interest. Sources
who declined to be named indicated that this seemed to be bad
news for Mars Direct who had hoped to retain Mars material in order
to support a luddite retirement community."
> I asked R. Zubrin this question. All he said was go read his book.
I really, really doubt Zubrin understands the implications of nanotech.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:26:52 MST