PB666

Strength of a paper is dependent on: Novelty New data and the power within that data (statistics) Corroborating data (different lines of observation or experimentation that show that lines are consistent, not flukes). Contriving theories is not generally a consideration unless its in a Journal devoted as such. I have seen many many manuscripts get published that are nothing more than technical descriptions. I have seen quite a few rejected that are too theoretical and do not provide adequate data. "open scientific communities" - the best journals IMHO and the only journals I will publish in are field-specific peer reviewed journals. Such journals have an editorial board and staff that elicit referees and keep the quality of the journal high and low quality publications out (as best as possible, its difficult to make something foolproof because fools are damn clever). Try to keep your ................... to the quality or weaknesses of the paper, particularly the methodological approaches and statistics as the saying goes don't waste good theory on bad or incomplete data.

And who taught you that?

If there is currently water on Mars, not ice, but some internally heated cycle, like the gysers in yellowstone, then they could look for and probably would find some stage of life. Here's the deal, if you have very advanced optics and chromatigraphy and a bit of luck, for example a plume of steam rising up from a steam bath with life in it, and a satellite photographing a sunset that crosses this might detect these molecules. So for instance lets say you have a sand pit, at the bottom of the pit you have water, chemical energy from a gyser underneath, and biota. The water may not be visible, steam may be evident just above the surface, and molecules of life could be in the steam, but no visible water on the surface. Again, would we recognize the life, and could robots sufficiently characterize it if thay landed on saud sites. Again, speculation, so be skeptical, this may just be NASA politics for the next mission.

http://spaceweathernews.com/studies-suggest-sun-triggers-massive-earthquakes/ Theory is in the verification phase.

http://www.salon.com/2015/09/26/the_milky_ways_missing_mass_partially_found_partner/ Watch the ads in the link, this one is a bit click baity.

Uh my generation invented vapor ware, as in why OS2 didn't take off years after IBM announced it would be out, yes it was bogged down, but for which the media called it vapor ware. Any time the press hype is years in front of the release date, its vapor ware.

I doubt even Rolls could pass off a 1600 km/h ride on the bypass as luxurious. Hmmm practical, no I can't see practical here, not when the sound barrier is a few hundred m/s. As far as vaporware is concerned we have been seeing the technology reports coming out now for about 7 years on the beeb, so yeah there is something vapory about it. Search Bloodhound on the beeb, there are something like 50 articles in the archive already. So it would seem you are wrong on both accounts, the only thing you are right about it is not a luxury car, but neither is a porshe 911.

I already referenced two such news reports in the Venus . . . Mars thread. I started hearing stuff yesterday

Eliminating doubled word phrases. The basic formula for that is N * (N-1)/2 So that if there are approximately 1,025,109 words 0.5 x 10E12 two word phrases. If you then want three words in a row you then 0.16 x 10E18 and so on. You can bias the ability to hit words knowing that certain words like the, a, numbers appear before nouns more frequently than other words. I frankly do not understand the videos fascination, If I were a space alien listening to Earth's end message I would think what absolute gibberish no wonder they went extinct. - - - Updated - - - You did, but I was simply making the point that by combining letters from all the known alphabets I could create more encompassing gibberish with less bandwidth. Therefore trumping the whole process.

words worth fighting for, lol.

Mars, no Venus, no-no Mars, No its has to be Venus. Has your space fantasy become perplexed with difficult decisions? Why leave Earth when you can put you space age rocket technology to work on the ground? Imagine sailng down the bypass at 1600 kilometers per, waving at passed aircraft, limited to a piddly 400 km/h below 3000 meters. If you can imagine this, this is your ride, .........just remember to order nine years in advance. http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34341017

As for your reducto absurbum i raise you one roman alphabet and one greek alphabet, plus two japanese alphabets, sanscrit, han/kange, throw in maya and egyptian heiroglyphics under the stipulation that just about everything that has been written contained elements from these, and I call.

did we need more of this?

http://www.copyright.gov/docs/fees.html yes and they could pay off our national debt, and the debt of every other country and person in the world except . . . . . . . . Themselves, they would be in a mountain of debt.

Well then looks like Venus has lost a fair amount of water also. Carbon dioxide can be dealt with Sulfer dioxide will react with metals Carbon monoxide can be dealt with Nitrogen, Helium, Argon and Neon are not problems. Problem is S03 would have to be reduced to sulfide forming sulfide salts such as Iron, and Nickle sulfide on the surface. Problem is there is insufficient hydrogen. Since the atmosphere is 92 bar if you dropped the temperature to the sublimation point of CO2 (Dry ice sublimes at −78.5 °C) at one bar and the triple point of SO2 is -75.5'C. Which means you could clear the atmosphere of both of these leaving .035 times 92 of approximately 3.22 atmospheres of nitrogen. The nitrogen will begin reacting with earths at some point and some of this will be bound. CO2 -----> C (diamond or graphite) + O2. 2SO2 + O2 + 2H20 ------> 2H2S04 + add alkali ------> 2Alk2SO4- + 2H20. Most of the alkali on the surface is going to either be in the form of Alalkali Oxides like Calcium Oxide, Magnesium Oxides, Aluminum Oxide. In areas with recent volcanism or extraordinarily high surface temperatures these degrade to form metals and oxide free radicals which would titer out carbon monoxide in the atmosphere. Since there is carbon monoxide then it means that most of the metals, should (repeat should, be in the metalic state, good for the mining industry, very bad for terraforming), the first thing that would happen to H2O is that it will burn the alkali metals, and secondarily after doing this they will react violently with the sulfer dioxide directly, very messy. So basically you can titrate the carbon dioxide with SO2, however after the SO2 runs out. Following this CO2 can react with water (unfortunately not much), but can undergo formation of metal and alkali carbonates. Unfortunately these tend also to bind up water at low temperatures and high pressure. So basically the water is gone. Getting the water back would require converting CO2 to carbon and essentially burying it, generating a heck of alot of oxygen. It can bind up metals, but at 65 bar of Oxygen, thats equivalent of 650 meters of water. Thats alot of surface turbulation (1000s of meters) to get rid of all that oxygen, not to mention average of 300 meters of coal that needs to be buried. You could in theory nitrify organics, such as Nitrosoaromatics. Nitrosobenzene as an example, you only need to bury about 20 meters of this across the surface. Smashing comets into the surface will not help much (these carry elements we need to get rid of), but one could devise a way to use RF to concentrate hydrogen in deep space and bring it back to Venus you could develop oceans and our ocean has alot of dissolved sulfate and carbonates. We also have vast areas of carbonate rocks, so carbon dioxide with lots of alkali earths and water is not too much of a problem, neither is SO2. Big problem is lack of hydrogen, if you have hydrogen you can deal with all of these things. Unlike Eve, no-one will be walking across the surface of Venus anytime soon, even a -100'C Venus, you are going to be walking across 1000 meters of dry-ice and sulfur dioxide, with mixed surface sulfates and no water. I should add, On Monday, it looks like NASA is going to announce they have found flowing water either on the surface or near the surface with one of their satellites, it would appear that some subterranean volcanic source has activated a buried reservoir of water, but I speculate. If so one of the blocks for Mars station could be solved, provided good source of power you could make fuel. At about 10% efficiency you can split water into hydrogen and oxygen, these can be stored at 2500 PSI until needs and liquified. ------------------------------ Added: http://www.iflscience.com/space/nasa-announce-major-discovery-regarding-mars-monday https://uk.news.yahoo.com/nasa-announce-discovered-flowing-water-104339386.html

Right, and there is another problem, for the closed end - bell shaped devices there is simply no way for material inside the bell to be ejected through the end plate (other than accelerating particles to the speed of light, not possible in such a short device), and no good reasoning for degassing of copper or copper oxides on the outside face of the plate. This really is getting spooky. All they are doing is creating a resonating electron field inside and apparatus. In the garage apparatus the RF generator (i.e. microwave) is separate and arbitrarily placed relative to the 'drive' so that its heat and electronics could, with a long enough conductor be rotated 360 degrees, in the XY and 360 degrees in the YZ or any rotation in the XYZ. This is of course a critique and a potential benefit of the crude apparatus, because its modular design means the generator can be directed separately than the copper resonator.

Why don't they just make a mission pack with KSP and provide out of game extension pack?

This (http://phys.org/news/2015-09-quantum-entanglement-goldilocks-effect.html?quarkcolor=mauve) may have some bearing on how the thruster works.

Oh, no, SO3 does not want to be up, its molecular weight is 80 and it is highly reactive with water below waters boiling point. This all comes crashing down once the super surface tempertaure fallls below the boiling point of water. The problem is, and I say this with A KSP grin.........the surface situation, mm a way to describe it having neutralized sulferic acid volatile, turbulant, most of the venutian surface would disappear much like being in the head of a volcanic reaction, the atmospher would like try to dissipate the energy by forming cyclones. The soil woul separtae, the silicone oxides settling down and the alkaline metals coming to the surface. yes the gas issue would subside as the atmospere reforms salts, but it would not be livable for a long time, at the end you would have a less greenhousey venus, but the only viable places would be peaks and slopes were rainfall, still highly acidic has washed all the alkali salts down into valleys and low lying areas. It would take generations.

Space lasers cause you know everyone likes the PEW, PEW sound.

The atmosphere cools because you place a large hideous reflector between it and the sun. saying its possible and actually doing it are two differnet things. Im not the one arguing for colonizing in etither of these highly fantasized thread. This thread is like arguing which is better; being impaled on a sharp pole roman style or being skewered like a pig on a roast.

It is easier to deal with the extras that venus has in the long run than lack thereofs of Mars. The big prblem of venus is simple i * hv > earths. Solution is the get rid if some of the i at L1. very expensive proposition, but theoretecically doable. H2SO4 <------- H20+ SO3 the reaction that gives venus its clouds Is driven by the heat of the surface. drivivg sulfate off the surface left alkali metals on the surface, sodium, lithium, potassioum in thier oxide and reduced forms. When the atmosphere cools sulferic acid will rain from those clouds and pelt the surface, which will explode. It will take generations for the acids to penetrate deep enoughbto sufficiently neutralize the excess of oxidized sulfer. Venus is not approachable in our lifetimes, maybe in 10000 years.

Mars needs to be move to another star system where it can orbit at approximately the same radiation levels as earth. Mass increased and a tone of asteroids slammed into it surface.

IOW most of the features lie in a zone of oblique sunlight and long harsh winters. None are below 30's preferential sites for colonization because of more constant yearround sunlight. In addition, there is confusion about the dry-ice content of the Ice, it is believed that much of the stores must be carbon dioxide because this would be required to raise atmosphere pressure and ice dust to persist. The Ice deposists below 45' are few and far between, in many of the images they show subsidence on the equitorial flank, which means there are probably generally thick layers of dust covering sublimated ice. 1. The bottom line is yes, Ice on Mars, no not clear how much, one estimate is 1.1 M for the entirety of mars at one time 2. Over 70 degrees this is heavily mixed with CO2, if not entirely CO2. 3. THere is a thick covering of dust particularly in the southern most regions that thens to isolated water. So as I originally stated, in the equitorial region, where you really want that water, its not there, to liberate that water, you are attempting to liberate from a place that has a poor source of energy. The other problem is that the reason water mobilizes is because mars axis can tilt up to 80 degrees, if that happens and you happen to be on an equitorial region, you could be spending 6 months in darkness. I also stated we are not ready to terriform mars, before you go marching over doing your Arnold Schwarzenegger impersonation, There are no nitrogen sources, there is no place really effective to store the hydrogen, other than releasing and reducing tons of CO2, and it would require a huge amount of energy to mobilize the water and convert it. If indeed the predictions were correct 1.1 meter of water over the surface is equal to 1/9th of an atmosphere. There would be a 2/16 or 1/8th reduction of that because of hydrogen removal, leaving or about 1/10th atmosphere. So no, bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt, still is not an atmosphere. In addition the level of oxygen would be 1/3rd of the 3/10ths of oxygen on earth, so there would be about as much oxygen as the tip of mount Everest. So it is not a viable atmosphere. Slam about 2 dozen comets into the surface and we can talk about the potential. In addition with the level of radiation plants could not grow, basically doom-world. The only viable option for mars is to build subterranean elevation after finding decent places were underground water is a prospect. We forget the great oxygenation event here on earth was accomplish by cyanobacterium and early trees, happy as larks to convert CO2 into O2 provided a warm sunnny place. Mars is neither warm or particularly sunny.

Given the high levels of C02 and carbon monoxide, which wants to be oxidized and low levels of O2, and the level of reduced metals in the martian soil, I would say it is relatively reducing compared to earths atmosphere. The metal/silicate dusts in concentrations would infiltrate the ice, ice sublimes under low pressure, fine dust will slow it down but will not stop it, over time the dust will sort around cavities in the ice, exposing more of it. There is no useful proof of the subterranean water, its quantity or its depth. Although I am sure it exists, I am also sure that it is not close to the surface, and only a fool would believe they could terraform a whole planet with an unknown amount of water. Even if that is the case you have to split water, into hydrogen and oxygen, and the hydrogen needs to be bound to something, hydrogen does not like to be bound to metals, for the most part, and there is no nitrogen, very inadequate amounts of carbon, mainly CO2. Proof? This is nothing more than wishful thinking by a mars colony dreamer. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, our probes are down there, beaming lasers at the rocks, there is water, but its not anywhere near enough to terraform a planet, its about the level where you might be able to have a green house dispersed every few kilometers on the surface, self-contained and pressurize to about 1/2 earths atmosphere. To say terraform and start throwing water around as the source of hydrogen for plants and oxygen for the atmosphere means that you have done the homework, you have drilled down into some fantastic reservoir and found the water, water buried deep underground is liquified by latent heat, so where is the ice crystals in the martian dust?