Findthepin1

Are we capable of detecting the atmosphere on one of the two planets mentioned in the OP?

As you can see, the sentence you are reading, this quite long one which I wrote to demonstrate this fact that speaking long sentences sounds somewhat more sophisticated than a shorter one; as opposed to a shorter sentence which can mistakenly imply that a speaker wont to forming short sentences might not be able to come up with a more substantial one. This sentence is shorter. It doesn't sound as smart. That should answer your question.

It being called a dwarf planet implies that it is small. If dwarf planets can be bigger than planets, the name dwarf planet is misleading and should be revised.

I don't understand this. There are two facts I know that are relevant to this. A; the moon was formed in a glancing blow collision between Earth and Theia. B; the moon is made mostly of Earth. If the collision was indeed a glancing blow, why is the moon's geology so similar to that of Earth? The material that went into Earth orbit should be mostly Theia.

Plus the fact that a dwarf planet can't be bigger than a planet.

We do. The wiki has a bunch of them in a list. Page is called Calculation tools.

I only play sandbox Bwahahahaha

Wowowow, wait. You know how Io has no ice? It's too close to the planet and the radiation took it away I assume. Laythe doesn't seem to have been able to form in its original position either, due to its mass. Here's my take on the history of it: Jupiter may have originally had a collection of Galilean moons. For simplicity and the sake of the scenario, we'll call them Io, Europa, and Ganymede. Those are just what I'm calling them in this scenario, even though we already have a Europa in the solar system. Like ours with one difference: Ganymede's orbit was switched with Europa's, and Europa, Io and Ganymede were both significantly more massive, say 3 or so moon masses each. You see, in OTL Io used to have ice when it formed, and was likely the most massive of the Galileans (the rocky part of Ganymede is less massive than the whole of Io) and the ice boiled off being too close to Jupiter. What I think happened in this timeline was: Io and Ganymede collided early in their history, and then the new large moon absorbed or ejected the remaining material around it, including Europa. Then most of the ice boiled away because of all the collisions. Since the orbit of the large moon was now between OTL's Io and Europa, most of what little ice was left was boiled away by the radiation while volcanism from tidal influences added stuff like nitrogen and CO2 to the atmosphere. The radiation also split the ice into hydrogen and oxygen, the former mostly escaping from proto-Laythe and the latter being heavy enough to stay in the atmosphere. Callisto was relatively unaffected by all this because it is so far away. This also means Laythe would have lots of sulphur in it. K, I gotta go I have school 2morrow and I gotta go thanks gonna check back on this in about 11 or 8 hours.

What about a human?

Well, in the latter situation it'd probably be warmer and just about all life would probably be bigger. There might be more flying animals. I don't know about the former situation. Earth probably wouldn't have a moon like the one it has, the tidal forces from the eccentric orbit would probably pull it away eventually. I can't simulate it in US2 because it is broken, but I digress. There are probably some articles on the net about eccentric Earthlike exoplanets. This would probably be similar to this. TL;DR: Word count: 104, Probably count: 9, 8.7% percent of the words here are "probably". Probably.

Me

I use a ship with <2.5km/s delta-v... primarily for LKO operations. Bwahahahaha

When I want to retire kerbals I send them to the bottom of the ocean or occasionally to the North Pole. Or they die in an explos- an experiment. What do you do?

I call the 200th Reply! XD So you are only missing LOD and Tracking. That should be easy enough. What was the latest launch date I had said in the form I filled out with my payload?

I don't think they'll be able to do this. They won't be able to get the product to Earth in a way that lets them profit. It's much more profitable to keep the wealth in space. Platinum is heavy. It will probably cost more to get it to the ground than the metal is actually worth. Better to build fuel stations on asteroids and mine the water. Heavy water too, if we can get to it. I mean, it's a ball of resources in a place where those resources are needed. Why move it to a place where the resources are only wanted?. Wait 100 years in the latter scenario and platinum is gonna be cheaper than peanuts in space. Because it's not necessarily needed. Water is going to be much, much more important than valuable minerals when we start being significantly in space. Ships will need it for drinking, and to grow crops, and for fuel, and for radiation protection, and for experiments, etc. You get the idea

No I meant later on like 2050 - 2060.

Bigelow sells their company in the early 2020s, likely to SpaceX. A bunch of asteroid mining companies start actually doing something. USA, India, China, Russia, Europe go to moon. Asteroid mining is restricted to space to prevent destroying the Terran economy by dumping ridiculous amounts of valuables into it. Now we have a space economy and a ground economy, and they stay basically separate until a space elevator is built. Earth ends up with lots of space elevators quickly. A Mars colony is planned and developed by a consortium of companies and something important fails and the project is abandoned. Life is discovered on Venus before 2030 and Europa before 2070. Humans go extinct before finding another civilization. The fact that the universe seems unaffected by advanced societies after 14 billion years means, IMO, something happens to them all when they reach a certain point.

I say fund both. It pains me how little we know about our own oceans. People think of them as big voids of nothing, but they're as interesting as the land. We didn't have proof that giant squids, for example, even existed until something like 2004 when there was a picture taken of one. It's like another planet. It's hypothetically possible that somewhere on the abyssal plain or in a trench, there are entire civilizations that we couldn't have noticed because a deep-sea creature coming up here is like us going outside on Mars in a shirt and pants. Air too thin to breathe, we die, so others don't go back in the same conditions. We can't go down there, it's as inhospitable to humans as the surface of the Moon. But it's scientifically essential as it takes up most of the only planet we know to have life.

I asked them about it later and they were referring to the main belt.

Oh, okay. Lol Well, if we want to find Vulcanoids, we should send something to Low Sun Orbit (oy vey) and have it point a telescope away from the Sun to look for asteroids outside its lower orbit. I have an idea for an architecture for a probe for this, I will update this post to show it later. Trust me with the mirrors. It will come in handy for the solar panels. Same with the glass, it should weaken the sunlight that gets to the panels to sane levels that we can deal with. It's redundant because I put more than one of them, but this may be unnecessary because it is at a lower altitude than the Vulcanoids and will orbit faster than them, so it will eventually have scanned all around the area for them. Only issue being that if we make it so there is only one probe, it can only communicate with Earth when it is nearly between Earth and the Sun. It can't turn around to point at Earth in another direction because the sun shield (not labeled but shown) only protects it from sunlight in the direction of the Sun. If the sun shield moves out of the way the probe overheats. If it were at the inner edge of the Vulcanoid zone at 0.08 AU, it would point close to Earth about once every 8.3 days, not accounting for Earth's movement, which by my suspicion puts the time closer to 9 days. 105km/s for a circular orbit and pi*2*0.08 AU is 0.50265 AU. At 105 km/s it would be an orbit of about 8.3 days. If it couldn't turn its antenna, it would have to operate independently for most of that time. We shouldn't make it so it can turn its antenna because it will rotate the rest of the spacecraft a bit and we don't want that, as mentioned above the sun shield might move out of the way and the spacecraft might be roasted. TL;DR: Spacecraft can be redundant and plural, or contact can be occasional and spacecraft independent, to avoid having our expensive probe fried, roasted, or stewed

Well, today I started new courses and we are doing space right now and the teacher said "Well, most asteroids actually orbit between Jupiter and Saturn, not near Earth, actually," in response to someone's question. Nobody else in the class visibly reacted to this. I'm probably going to fail that course because nobody else knows what they're doing. XD

You say it is 0.8-0.21 AU. But Venus and Mercyry are there and would mess up the orbits. Did you mean 0.08-0.21 AU? Also, we have no evidence that the Vulcanoids even exist. Only a stable orbit zone at the predicted distance.

Landing on Duna. So far.

Were you just passing through the solar atmosphere and going back up to high space? That's not so bad compared to some other stuff I've seen people do. Do the words "Low Sun Orbit" scare you much? XD

Why don't we just not have those asteroids in the alternate universe? Like, in Seveneves they have an asteroid called Amalthea even thought there's a moon named Amalthea IRL but it doesn't seem to exist in the book. That way we could keep Bellona and Persephone and Apollo and Minerva and Aurora and Eris and Amphitrite. Speaking of Amphitrite, I thought we couldn't put it into the system?