this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
1690 points (95.3% liked)

Science Memes

11161 readers
1670 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Venus would take longer, but would be vastly easier to terraform to a habitable world. The atmosphere should be able to be transformed into an earth like atmosphere by dumping a few comets and some bacteria in. Might take the bacteria a few thousand years, but they did it here in Earth caused the first mass extinction.

We might wanna check to see if any bacteria exist on Venus first, but honestly if there are, they haven't made the evolutionary jump in the last 4 billion years, so I doubt it will happen just cause we add the necessary water.

While we are at it, we may as well solve the dark forest problem, turn the solar system into a massive spaceship, and extend the life of our sun, by turning Mercury into a solar thruster/ star lifter.

[–] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm partial to the idea of converting Mercury into a star lifter / thruster / planetary shade. Blocking sunlight to Venus would cause the atmosphere to cool, then freeze and fall as snow. Then you can disassemble Venus too for more raw material. That's a massive store of carbon, oxygen, and sulfur. Solar powered mass drivers operating out of a planetary vacuum cut costs of launching material into space.

People often object to the idea because we can't afford it, it's too difficult, or out of concern for preserving those planets. Yeah, we won't be doing all that. It will be our descendants in the far future. A task for new civilizations, over eons. Discovering life on Mercury and Venus is a long shot. But if it is there, it's doomed without human intervention. Convert those two planets to Dyson swarm, and they'll have matter for countless orbital habitats, not just for whoever humans evolve into, but for nature preserves too.

I've watched a bunch of Isaac Arthur.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Don't disassemble Venus. That planet is far too easy to terraform. Disassemble Mars, asteroids, and the various otherwise useless moons, comets, asteroids, and proto-planets in the heliosphere

Take a look at my other comment in this thread.

https://lemmy.world/comment/5171378

[–] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Dont worry dude, I won't. I promise. 😆

Well, I understand the argument for terraforming, and I'd bet good money we will terraform it long before disassembly, but I'm more of an O'Neil Cylinder / Dyson Swarm kind of guy. I prefer the idea of overwhelming surface area via orbital habitats rather than colonizing gravity wells. I also don't trust Venus not to catastrophically resurface itself and refill the atmosphere with CO2 and sulphuric acid in a mass volcanic event.

Long term, but far too soon the Sun will expand into a red giant and devour Mercury, Venus, and likely Earth as well. If it's possible to employ a Dyson Swarm to lift material from a star to reduce its mass, then it may be feasible to prevent or mitigate the red giant phase to preserve Earth and extend its habitability, perhaps indefinitely. If preserving the birthplace of known life seems more important than building a copy in a more precarious orbit, then we ought to sacrifice that copy to expand the Dyson Swarm and mine the Sun faster. Mercury first though. We've got time. Mars can probably go too.

Oh yes, and if the notion of slowly altering Earth's orbit by tossing asteroids past us ever needs to happen, then surely rapid firing 2 or 3 planets worth of material across our bow ought to get the job done much faster.

Considering the eons involved with stripping both inward planets down to the last bucketful though, I'm certainly in favor of a few millennia to fully explore and research them both beforehand.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

A properly configured solar thruster doubles as a starlifting platform. Kurzgesagt has a video on is as well as PBS Spacetime

[–] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not seeing why the same couldn't be said for Mars, drop some mold spores and water bears down there, maybe some photosynthetic bacteria, slowly build a blanket of CO2 to warm the planet, melt/release the water from the surface, a thousand years gives a habitable planet, no asteroid steering required.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Mars is roughly a single order of magnitude larger than The Moon, in mass. The Earth is roughly 81 times the mass of The Moon. Mars doesn't have a magnetic field protecting it, and can't unless we add a significant amount of metals, and mass to the planet. It also doesn't have an atmosphere due to the two previous facts.

Meanwhile, Venus is roughly the size of The Earth at a scale of 4.8673 : 5.97222. It doesn't have enough water though. It also doesn't have a large iron core to create a magnetic field to protect the inhabitants. However, we could re-route several comets fairly easily to impact Venus giving it a small amount of mass, but also all the water that is needed to start the bacteria creating a Nitrogen rich atmosphere that has a large percentage of Oxygen, turning Venus into a tropical planet that will lose its atmosphere in a few billion years. To counteract this, as we throw 20-30 comets at Venus, we should also throw 100-200 Iron rich asteroids at Venus so that they will be absorbed into the molten core and form a magnetic field for Venus.

Now we have 2 Earth-like planets in a few hundred to thousand years.

To create such a gravitational well on Mars, so that we aren't constantly losing both our normal skeletural muscles, but also more importantly, our organ muscles, you would have to create a stable black hole in the core of Mars, or you would have to bombard Mars, and its pathetic moons, with millions of asteroids.

To create a long term naturally stable, new earth, Venus is just closer to the masses that we actually need. By dropping just the comets onto Venus you just added a lot of mass, and that gets Venus even closer to being "Earth-like." We will have to give Venus a comparative moon, but with asteroid mining, and starlifting, that shouldn't be an issue.

By using Mercury to create a solar thruster, we gain access to unlimited space dust, that will form unlimited asteroids for us, in the Kuiper Belt.