A solution to the magnetosphere problem of colonizing mars

[Clockwork13]

We simply need to give Mars more atmosphere at the same rate it's losing its current atmosphere to solar winds. After all, giving it a magnetosphere unless going to drastic measures is probably impossible, so the best way to keep Mars habitable would be by somehow supplying it with as much gasses as it is losing. Really to do this we'd just need to actively pump a very specific amount of CO2 into the atmosphere, and either plant a lot of plants on it, or start planting genetically modified plants designed to suck up CO2 and release oxygen much faster. Mars supposedly has nitrogen under its surface, so that could be used as a source of nitrogen until other sources are found.

[SomeGuy12]

Why does anyone waste their time with such silly ideas? Why not plan on a way to get to the Moon using a gunpowder rocket?

Nobody is ever going to terraform Mars, or any other planet, unless it's some eccentric rich owner of an entire planet who does it for kicks. Instead, we will invent some kind of self replicating factory - look in the mirror if you need proof it's possible to build one - and we'll convert planets to forms that are more useful to us.

For present day humanity, that form would be a bunch of spinning stations. You could build spinning stations with the combined surface area of many many times that of Mars, housing thousands of times more people (or giving the people you house far more living space) using the matter found in Mars. Inside each station, probably shaped like a spinning wheel with carbon nanotube cables as spokes, there's no air leakage, the distance from the sun would be set to minimize radiation exposure, the whole "station" would have engines and be able to move, and the environment is perfectly controlled for the inhabitants.

For future successors to humanity, they would probably be able to "live" in solid state chunks of computing machinery and wouldn't need any inefficient things like a station, just chunks of computing machinery positioned an optimal distance from the sun.

[Clockwork13]

Why does anyone waste their time with such silly ideas? Why not plan on a way to get to the Moon using a gunpowder rocket?

Cause honestly the moon isn't all that interesting. You can't make the Moon habitable, and all there really is is craters.

Nobody is ever going to terraform Mars, or any other planet, unless it's some eccentric rich owner of an entire planet who does it for kicks.

"Owner of a planet"

So we are going to be able to claim ownership over planets (assuming we can get there) yet not be able to make any planets habitable?

Instead, we will invent some kind of self replicating factory - look in the mirror if you need proof it's possible to build one - and we'll convert planets to forms that are more useful to us.

Uhh have no idea what you point is, are you saying we turn planets into animals???

For present day humanity, that form would be a bunch of spinning stations. You could build spinning stations with the combined surface area of many many times that of Mars, housing thousands of times more people (or giving the people you house far more living space) using the matter found in Mars. Inside each station, probably shaped like a spinning wheel with carbon nanotube cables as spokes, there's no air leakage, the distance from the sun would be set to minimize radiation exposure, the whole "station" would have engines and be able to move, and the environment is perfectly controlled for the inhabitants.

So we could use expensive equipment to mine mars, use expensive rockets to haul it into space, then use expensive equipment to assemble hundreds if not thousands of stations. Is this supposed to be any less expensive or time consuming?

For future successors to humanity, they would probably be able to "live" in solid state chunks of computing machinery and wouldn't need any inefficient things like a station, just chunks of computing machinery positioned an optimal distance from the sun.

So are you saying that we will be able to live in computers? And weren't you just suggesting we live in stations?

Edited September 23, 2015 by Clockwork13

[SomeGuy12]

Are you trolling in your response?

The "gunpowder rocket" analogy was to point out another stupid and pointless mental exercise. Nobody is ever going to build gunpowder rockets able to reach the Moon except for kicks, and nobody is ever going to terraform a planet, except for kicks. It's a horrible solution to a problem.

I pointed out that the "for kicks" reason is the only reason to terraform a planet, such as in some future world where eccentric people can own entire planets. I'm not saying that will ever happen.

A self replicating factory is a container full of machinery that can duplicate all of the machinery in the container. The human body is such a factory. Equipment made by a self replicating factory is very close to "free" because you only have to pay to construct the first factory and then it can copy itself without human labor, gathering it's own raw materials, trillions of times.

I'm saying that the human body is so limited that a realistic outcome is that future people won't use them at all.

[AngelLestat]

until we dont know exactly how much atmosphere mars would lose by solar pressure, this question seems kinda pointless.

In my opinion, the atmosphere that mars will lose, is the lower of our concerns for terraforming mars.

[Motokid600]

Biodomes... just.. biodomes. Or under ground. Or both..

To take it even further as the op has... after a thousand years. When we have a vast network of what you see in that picture. We would have already been on our way to terraforming the planet. The construction of such a network will naturally begin the process of pumping green house gases into the atmosphere. If only a very little at a time. Then once we have such foothold established we can then start purposely polluting the planet. In a good way. So maybe in the 23rd century or so Mars will be on its way to warming up. Then its only a matter of generating more atmosphere then the sun can whisp away. Which should be easy.

Edited September 23, 2015 by Motokid600

[legoclone09]

Why not put factories on it to make CO2, then intoduce bio-engineered bacteria to make O2 and introduce plants as well.

[RuBisCO]

As a transhumanist I agree with SomeGuy12: if we upload ourselves into machines we won't need food, water, air, etc, so why terraform?

Also the asteroids provide the best prospects for colorization (of humans or machines), easiest to get to, all the elements available (c-types) continuous source of power (sunlight).

[RainDreamer]

As a transhumanist I agree with SomeGuy12: if we upload ourselves into machines we won't need food, water, air, etc, so why terraform?

Also the asteroids provide the best prospects for colorization (of humans or machines), easiest to get to, all the elements available (c-types) continuous source of power (sunlight).

Mars is reachable now, and the technology required to keep us alive there for a long time is also near future. I am all for cybernetic bodies, but I don't think we will have that by the time we colonize Mars.

[RuBisCO]

Mars is reachable now, and the technology required to keep us alive there for a long time is also near future. I am all for cybernetic bodies, but I don't think we will have that by the time we colonize Mars.

I don't know about that, we could have landed on mars over a decade ago, but due to pure human laziness we decided not to invest in it. We landed on the moon last in 72' and never went back simply because of our own political incompetence. Strong AI may be around by 2030, human population is estimated to plateau between 2050-2070 at 9-10 billion. If machines out-mod us it is likely we would die off in mass after that simply due to lack of breeding.

We would need a manned colonization effort of at least hundred on mars by the end of this century to establish and sustainable colony.

[cantab]

Agreed. Any civilization with the technology and resources to terraform a planet will be able to keep the atmosphere "topped up" against slow losses. Lack of a magnetic field is a non-issue. Thermal escape of the atmosphere is only an issue when it's at real breakneck pace.

[Mazon Del]

Really the thing about Mars' atmosphere bleedoff is that on human scales of time, it isn't happening. If we jammed enough atmosphere onto the planet that humans could walk around unaided, then we could leave it be for a million years and there would be barely any change. If we are still around in a form that cares about such things a few million years after that, it is probably quite easy to "fix" the problem.

[Clockwork13]

Agreed. Any civilization with the technology and resources to terraform a planet will be able to keep the atmosphere "topped up" against slow losses. Lack of a magnetic field is a non-issue. Thermal escape of the atmosphere is only an issue when it's at real breakneck pace.

Agreed

(also bumping to reopen any discussion)

[Kruleworld]

Agreed. Any civilization with the technology and resources to terraform a planet will be able to keep the atmosphere "topped up" against slow losses. Lack of a magnetic field is a non-issue. Thermal escape of the atmosphere is only an issue when it's at real breakneck pace.

I thought the magnetic field was needed for radiation protection, not to stop the planet loosing atmosphere???

[fredinno]

Are you trolling in your response?

The "gunpowder rocket" analogy was to point out another stupid and pointless mental exercise. Nobody is ever going to build gunpowder rockets able to reach the Moon except for kicks, and nobody is ever going to terraform a planet, except for kicks. It's a horrible solution to a problem.

I pointed out that the "for kicks" reason is the only reason to terraform a planet, such as in some future world where eccentric people can own entire planets. I'm not saying that will ever happen.

A self replicating factory is a container full of machinery that can duplicate all of the machinery in the container. The human body is such a factory. Equipment made by a self replicating factory is very close to "free" because you only have to pay to construct the first factory and then it can copy itself without human labor, gathering it's own raw materials, trillions of times.

I'm saying that the human body is so limited that a realistic outcome is that future people won't use them at all.

Assuming space colony construction is easier than terraforming. Both are extremely difficult, and one has the advantage of people preferring it due to human land-ism.

[cantab]

I thought the magnetic field was needed for radiation protection, not to stop the planet loosing atmosphere???

I think that's a misconception. My understanding is a decent atmosphere provides ample protection against high-energy solar and cosmic radiation. Ultraviolet will go through a generic atmosphere but is handled by ozone which will tend to form if there's oxygen.

[YNM]

Maybe we should electrolyze all the rust on Mars. Then there's just so much O2...

[Rune]

Assuming space colony construction is easier than terraforming. Both are extremely difficult, and one has the advantage of people preferring it due to human land-ism.

You have to admit, the prospect of manipulating a few megatonnes of matter to build a city-sized space colony, sounds a lot better than processing the couple thousand teratonnes of elements that make up an atmosphere... by about something like six to nine magnitudes (Mars' is 25 teratons, right now, give or take, and Earth's five thousand and something). I.E: one project is of a comparable scale to a human (city-sized), the other is of a planetary scale.

My personal opinion is that terraforming is not only inefficient, it is also a crime against nature. Who knows if we are wiping out life, or the possibility of life, when we mess with the place? Better to study it without screwing with it! Space colonies can be more easily tuned to make an Earth analogue, too.

I think that's a misconception. My understanding is a decent atmosphere provides ample protection against high-energy solar and cosmic radiation. Ultraviolet will go through a generic atmosphere but is handled by ozone which will tend to form if there's oxygen.

Yup, if you want to shield against cosmic rays, magnetic field protection is pretty much useless, GCRs just travel with too much damn energy to be stopped by anything except hitting a bunch of atoms head-on. A planetary mag field would stop the far slower solar wind better during, say, a solar storm... but the atmosphere would also stop that, so who cares.

Rune. Planetary chauvinism will take a long while to disappear yet...

Edited September 26, 2015 by Rune

[TrainEngie]

Maybe we should electrolyze all the rust on Mars. Then there's just so much O2...

That seems inefficient to go through so much iron dirt just to release oxygen; the iron and the oxygen will just become rust again in a matter of whatever time.

[YNM]

That seems inefficient to go through so much iron dirt just to release oxygen; the iron and the oxygen will just become rust again in a matter of whatever time.

What about iron sand-fueled SRB, or maybe we can just make the iron into buildings...

[Xannari Ferrows]

We should not colonize mars. Good god, just keep it as a field of study instead of making it a home. Live off what you bring, or what you are given.

[SargeRho]

We should not colonize mars. Good god, just keep it as a field of study instead of making it a home. Live off what you bring, or what you are given.

Any particular reason why?

[Bill Phil]

Any particular reason why?

Why colonize at all?

The only real answer to that is:

A: we should do it to spread our civ

and

B: eggs and baskets and whatnot

But both of those reasons apply to to in-space colonies, and colonies elsewhere. And it could be said that in space colonies are much better than surface colonies as well, and so :

Why colonize Mars?

[Xannari Ferrows]

We don't need to spread our civilization. We are sufficiently capable of controlling how we use what we have now. Just because we don't doesn't mean it needs to be worked around.

[Bill Phil]

We don't need to spread our civilization. We are sufficiently capable of controlling how we use what we have now. Just because we don't doesn't mean it needs to be worked around.

I'm not saying we need to, that's just a common answer to the question. It is good to do, though, as it would increase the total number of people, increasing the rate of discovery.