Living at other worlds - A paradigm shift

[AngelLestat]

Recently, I notice how hard is for humans to imagine a living place without a ground.

If we search solar (or other star) system colonization, we will see only these examples:

mars, moon, space stations, europa surface, titan, hypothetic ground worlds, etc.

Are those the best options?

I will prove that if we only search Earth-like planets in look and conditions, then we would be discarding more than 95% of planets that might have better conditions for us without the "ground" look aspect.

So, lets detail the range of conditions which humans can survive and grow up:

Pressure: 0.2 atm to 15 atm if we breath gas, up to 100 atm if we breath a liquid rich in oxygen with density similar to water or less.

Temperature: -10c to 40c (without expend extra energy).

Gravity: 0.5g to 1.3g (hard to know with accuracy)

Radioctivity: Less than 10 mSv per year.

Elements: water, oxygen, carbon, etc.

Energy: Can be chemical, electromagnetic, kinetic, thermal, etc.

Extra things that helps in the choice:

-Easy access to space; being an interplanetary sociaty this helps.

-Ground, if there is none, there are cases that we need to build it.

-Economic purpose; as value resources, easy access to energy, strategic location.

The surface misconception:

Instead starting to compare, lets think some possible cases to open our mind.

If we search saturn gravity at surface... we will see that surface in this case means heigth with 1 atm of pressure.

Some said: "is not possible to live in uranus, saturn, venus, etc because there are winds from 50 to 600 m/s."

With this same mentality we can said that is not possible to live at earth equator because the ground moves at 460m/s.

Now, we always thought in planets with a 2D point of view. What are the conditions at ground level if it has any? this takes us to reject almost all worlds.

When in fact we need to ask: Does this planet have any zone (3D point of view) with similar conditions to the earth?

-----------------------------------

Example: Enceladus is a very bad place to live in its surface. We do not know how it looks inside.. So lets try to imagine the best conditions that we might find:

If the temperature rise with depth, then we would find a place which water is at liquid state, with certain pressure and temperature we might find a liquid substance which retain lot of oxygen and we can breath, in case is not good carring co2 out, we can filter the co2 from any important vein.

The strong magnetic fields may produce a luminescence that allow us to see inside at certain depth, or it can be related to some living organism that expell oxygen using thermal energy.

If there is nothing of that, then is easy to just build a thin plastic envelope to contain our air habitat, if this thing rotate we may have artificial gravity.

---------------------------------

Gas giants depending their distance to the star, they all have layer places where the temperature and pressure and water vapor (which always matches temperature) are inside the human parameters.

So, lets compare places in the solar system using these parameters to find which might have potential.

Also lets try to imagine what it would be the most weird case to live.

[Bill Phil]

Humans can't breathe liquid in our current state...

We also can't handle 100 Atmospheres unless it's a similar pressure inside the body.

[Kryten]

That's not what 'paradigm shift' means.

[Meecrob]

"Some said: "is not possible to live in uranus, saturn, venus, etc because there are winds from 50 to 600 m/s."

With this same mentality we can said that is not possible to live at earth equator because the ground moves at 460m/s."

Does it move at 460m/s plus 600m/s winds? Winds are always relative to the ground. Also, one must consider the density of the atmospheres. All the ones you mentioned are more dense than that of Earth's, meaning more mass is being accelerated towards you in their winds when compared to Earth.

[Vanamonde]

Without ground, what are you going to build upon? Where are you going to grow your crops? How difficult would it be to try to live in a place where anything you drop will never been seen again? What useful resources can be gathered solely from the atmosphere without access to the surface?

We already have access to an environment which has no solid surface but is otherwise suitable for us: earth's ocean. No one lives there, for these and other reasons.

I'm not saying it couldn't be done. But I am saying you'd need an awfully compelling reason to develop the technology and put forth the expense to live in a place like that, and it simply isn't going to be worth it for the vast majority of planets.

[Stargate525]

We already have access to an environment which has no solid surface but is otherwise suitable for us: earth's ocean. No one lives there, for these and other reasons.

http://www.app.com/story/life/home-garden/luxury/2015/01/19/woman-pays-per-year-live-luxury-cruise-ship/21869211/

http://www.seasteading.org/floating-city-project/

http://freedomship.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houseboat

It's being done small-scale, and the only reason we aren't doing it in large-scale yet is because we haven't filled the landmass to capacity yet.

[AngelLestat]

Humans can't breathe liquid in our current state...

We also can't handle 100 Atmospheres unless it's a similar pressure inside the body.

Yes we can breath liquid, and if we do, then pressure inside our body would be similar to outside. That is the point.

Take the case of the Cachalot, a huge mammal that can dive up to 2250 mts (220 atm) without breath liquid (only air).

And may not exceed that because after all, has to rise to surface to breathe again.

The problem with pressure (and humans) is that nitrogen dissolve into the bloodstream at higher pressure.

For that reason scuba divers remplace nitrogen with hellium, and if they wanna go more deep, then they remplace hellium with hydrogen.

So they breath oxygen and hydrogen. But even with that mix it reach the point when hydrogen or oxygen also dissolve in the blood, and we die.

They can reach 300 mts with this technique, they take 14 min in go down, and 12 hours to rise (body becomes soda if we rise very fast)

If you remember the movie Abyss, they put a rat in perfluorocarbon (with red tint for a cool looking), and the rat breath just fine.. That scene was real, Cameron take the rat as pet before that.

This same thing was do it by Navy seals in 1980, they were searching ways to go out from submarines without descompression issues.

In fact, breathing liquid, you can go down to 1000 mts or more, and go back fast to the surface, spit out all the liquid, and you will be fine without any decompression sickness.

In the actuality, breathing liquid is used to save premature babies, adults with lungs issues and as thermal cooling (the same as top computers).

http://www.independent.co.uk/migration_catalog/article5262850.ece/alternates/w620/DiverSuit.jpeg

You can use this technique to survive in a liquid world with a gravity of 5 to 10G (in case your breathing liquid had the same density than external liquid)

That's not what 'paradigm shift' means.

Why not?

Does it move at 460m/s plus 600m/s winds? Winds are always relative to the ground. Also, one must consider the density of the atmospheres. All the ones you mentioned are more dense than that of Earth's, meaning more mass is being accelerated towards you in their winds when compared to Earth.

See, this is hard, a lot of people had problems with this concept.

The atmosphere density doesn´t matter. Because you are moving with the atmosphere, so in your case there is no wind.

The same happens at earth, we can said that there is no wind, but in fact the wind is also moving at 460m/s with the surface.

So the only apparent wind that we feel comes from the difference in wind speed with respect our speed.

Ballons does not feel any wind speed, because they travel with the wind.

Jupiter case! Tell me how do you would measure its rotation speed?

It does not have surface that we can measure..

However Jupiter is the planet that most fast rotates.. but the thing that rotates is the atmosphere.. "winds", in other words, the whole planet.

So you have many layers that you can call surface, and each layer has its constant distinctive speed. If you are in one of those layers, then you will feel the same as at earth, any difference on wind at that altitude is the thing you would call "wind".

But we have big difference in winds here at earth because our atmosphere is very thin and is very close to surface (terrain change winds the same as rocks in a river), you have clouds and different terrains which change the way you distribute the heat. Plus other factors that you dont find in big atmospheres.

So being in one of those atmosphere at any height, you would not feel winds or turbulances, if you do, they would be a lot more soft than fly at high altitud in ballon here on earth (which is still very soft).

Also when we enter in worlds, we always do it following the same direction of winds, so instead brake 8000 m/s, we need to brake 7600 m/s (earth´s winds that follow earth´s rotation).

Without ground, what are you going to build upon? Where are you going to grow your crops? How difficult would it be to try to live in a place where anything you drop will never been seen again? What useful resources can be gathered solely from the atmosphere without access to the surface?

We already have access to an environment which has no solid surface but is otherwise suitable for us: earth's ocean. No one lives there, for these and other reasons.

I'm not saying it couldn't be done. But I am saying you'd need an awfully compelling reason to develop the technology and put forth the expense to live in a place like that, and it simply isn't going to be worth it for the vast majority of planets.

Comparing with earth is not fair. If we need to colonize other world (by X reasons, does not matter here), then you came to the conclusion that each m2 on mars is more complicate than a m2 of floating base to grow up crops.

Depending the compounds of the atmosphere, we can get a lot of materials from the atmosphere it self, we also can find an atmosphere a lot more dense than our air, which means that a m3 of air would lift a lot more in that place.

For example, trees grow using co2 from the air.. they need the soil just to not fall and get water.

[KerikBalm]

It's being done small-scale, and the only reason we aren't doing it in large-scale yet is because we haven't filled the landmass to capacity yet.

Making a habitable space is not the same thing as making a self sufficient colony.

Those cruiser ships and house boats go into ports, and take supplies that were produced entirely on land.

Where are you going to take on supplies if you're floating in the atmosphere of Jupiter/Saturn/Uranus/Neptune?

So, lets detail the range of conditions which humans can survive and grow up:

Pressure: 0.2 atm to 15 atm if we breath gas, up to 100 atm if we breath a liquid rich in oxygen with density similar to water or less.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_breathing

"Because liquid breathing is still a highly experimental technique, there are several proposed approaches."

And then you need a very very specific atmosphere of perflurocarbons, and high oxygen concentrations...

And the long term effects are not known... I suspect there would be massive developmental defects.... Not to mention I think you'll never find an atmosphere at 100 atm that meets the temperature and chemical composition requirements.

At the other end... 0.2 atm is well within the armstrong limit, and its one reason I think Duna should be pretty habitable in KSP... it gets warm enough on Duna (I know the thermometers don't work right thought) that water should exist in the liquid state at that pressure.

But for any sort of long term, self sufficient colony, you need access to some minerals... iron, sodium, calcium, phosphorus, etc - these will not be found in an atmosphere that humans could survive in (though in an ocean, they could be dissolved - but it would take extreme amounts of energy to get sufficient quanitities to start building things, but a colony inside Europa isn't so out there.... the reduced gravity means you could go a lot deeper before the pressure is too much, and possibly have access to the rocky bottom)

Take the case of the Cachalot, a huge mammal that can dive up to 2250 mts (220 atm) without breath liquid (only air)

You are French, aren't you?

It can temporarily survive 100 atmoshpheres, if it were to breath down there, it would ide when surfacing.

What an animal has evolved to adapt to for short durations, does not correspond with what humans could tolerate for a long duration (years, not minutes)

[78stonewobble]

If there is nothing of that, then is easy to just build a thin plastic envelope to contain our air habitat, if this thing rotate we may have artificial gravity.

---------------------------------

A thin plastic envelope to hold people and equipment flung around quickly enough to simulate a sizable amount of gravity on a body that has gravity? o.O

I think i've heard of this... It's a rollercoaster.

[Stargate525]

Making a habitable space is not the same thing as making a self sufficient colony.

Those cruiser ships and house boats go into ports, and take supplies that were produced entirely on land.

Where are you going to take on supplies if you're floating in the atmosphere of Jupiter/Saturn/Uranus/Neptune?

Nothing is self-sufficient. The life support problems are being solved already for potential Mars missions and bases. Like most colonies, it will probably need regular deliveries of manufactured goods and tech. All it needs to produce in situ is oxygen and water. Doable on Jupiter and Saturn, and much easier on Uranus and Neptune.

[Mazon Del]

The problem has never been that we couldn't genetically engineer or surgically modify ourselves to live in strange and fascinating environments. It's that we want to find a place where we don't have to AND live in comfort.

The human tests with the liquid filled lungs had some success, but they had the downside that the users lungs CONSTANTLY felt like they were on fire.

If we wanted to, we could colonize a lot more of Earth than we do now by throwing money at GE or the tech to do so. You occasionally get a few people interested in trying it out or willing to be there for a while to collect science data, but the vast majority of people don't WANT to live in those situations. Not to mention that human-based GE is still in its early days.

[AngelLestat]

Making a habitable space is not the same thing as making a self sufficient colony.

Those cruiser ships and house boats go into ports, and take supplies that were produced entirely on land.

Where are you going to take on supplies if you're floating in the atmosphere of Jupiter/Saturn/Uranus/Neptune?

The atmospheres at different levels had different components which you can process.

I am agree that these gas giants may not be the best candidates for colonization due how hard is to leave the gravity well and how hard is to float in an atmosphere that already has a lot of hellium and hydrogen. So even if you use hot hydrogen, you would not get much lift of it.

But not sure what is the composition on lower layers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_breathing

"Because liquid breathing is still a highly experimental technique, there are several proposed approaches."

And then you need a very very specific atmosphere of perflurocarbons, and high oxygen concentrations...

And the long term effects are not known... I suspect there would be massive developmental defects.... Not to mention I think you'll never find an atmosphere at 100 atm that meets the temperature and chemical composition requirements.

We practice with perlurocarbons... but is not the only substance that can carry oxygen.

Another substance that works is silicone oil. But they choose these because they are good for transport oxygen as co2. But if you search for only Oxygen rich liquids and you filter the co2 directly from one of your veins, then you have many candidates to choose. Maybe hydrogen peroxide.

You are right about a gas atmosphere of 100 ATM, it will be very hot.

But it can be a liquid, as they are not compressive, they temperature does not rise with the pressure.

Also you dont need 100 atm to use this, you can use it at 1atm, or 10atm, or 100 or more.

What you might find that certain liquid can only capture oxygen at certain pressure. That is where your liquid possibilities rise a lot.

Also remember that these studies never get many founds, because there is not a clear commercial use yet.

So the fact that we know few breathing liquids it does not mean there are few.

At the other end... 0.2 atm is well within the armstrong limit, and its one reason I think Duna should be pretty habitable in KSP... it gets warm enough on Duna (I know the thermometers don't work right thought) that water should exist in the liquid state at that pressure.

As you can see in all my values, I took the ones that had sense in long term exposure.

But I never check Duna pressure. I had only an idea that was much dense than mars.

But for any sort of long term, self sufficient colony, you need access to some minerals... iron, sodium, calcium, phosphorus, etc - these will not be found in an atmosphere that humans could survive in (though in an ocean, they could be dissolved - but it would take extreme amounts of energy to get sufficient quanitities to start building things, but a colony inside Europa isn't so out there.... the reduced gravity means you could go a lot deeper before the pressure is too much, and possibly have access to the rocky bottom)

The idea to this post is to look in all places, in this solar system or in hypothetical star systems.

Just to see if there is places where we can survive that we never thought about it.

You are French, aren't you?

It can temporarily survive 100 atmoshpheres, if it were to breath down there, it would ide when surfacing.

What an animal has evolved to adapt to for short durations, does not correspond with what humans could tolerate for a long duration (years, not minutes)

No, from Argentina, here is called Cachalote. From the english wiki I had 2 names to choose.. Sperm whale and cachalot. So I made the obvious choose for me

But is breathing gases without problems on decompression sickness. And goes down to 2000 mts! Many think that the pressure would crush you literally. This is a prove that what it kills you is not the pressure. Are the gasses inside you.

A thin plastic envelope to hold people and equipment flung around quickly enough to simulate a sizable amount of gravity on a body that has gravity? o.O

I think i've heard of this... It's a rollercoaster.

Yeah I draw a similar rollercoaster before, here you go:

http://s20.postimg.org/jdf1f7a7x/Moon_Artificial_Gravity.jpg

In enceladus case, the gravity is so low, that it can be just a cylinder. With a extra envelope layer so you dont get friction with the water.

If you live and breath inside the water without envelope, then you dont need to have artificial gravity. In fact gravity inside a liquid it feels as a pressure in all your body from all directions. That is why you can live in worlds with 20G if you are swimming.

The problem has never been that we couldn't genetically engineer or surgically modify ourselves to live in strange and fascinating environments. It's that we want to find a place where we don't have to AND live in comfort.

The human tests with the liquid filled lungs had some success, but they had the downside that the users lungs CONSTANTLY felt like they were on fire.

You feel like fire because you never done that kind of effort with your lungs, is like you go out to run for first time when you never do any exercise. You feel your muscles burn.

And the lungs are muscles. They just need to get used to. But is true that perflurocarbons are not the best because they are almost 2 times more viscous than water. But this does not mean that you can not find better liquids to do the job.

Or you can have two ducts to your lungs moving that liquid for you.

If we wanted to, we could colonize a lot more of Earth than we do now by throwing money at GE or the tech to do so. You occasionally get a few people interested in trying it out or willing to be there for a while to collect science data, but the vast majority of people don't WANT to live in those situations. Not to mention that human-based GE is still in its early days.

The problem is that you need to be brave enoght to resist the drowning effects of the first seconds.

[Bill Phil]

@AngelestatWe can't breathe a liquid. We don't have the organs to extract oxygen from it. The tiny things in the organs would be too saturated with liquid. So... None of that. And why would us breathing liquid increase internal pressure?

[Meecrob]

See, this is hard, a lot of people had problems with this concept.

The atmosphere density doesn´t matter. Because you are moving with the atmosphere, so in your case there is no wind.

The same happens at earth, we can said that there is no wind, but in fact the wind is also moving at 460m/s with the surface.

So the only apparent wind that we feel comes from the difference in wind speed with respect our speed.

I admit, I misunderstood the point you were trying to get across and that is my fault. Saying many people have problems with this concept and then re-hashing what I replied to you with is a sure-fire way to sound condescending, rather than explain what you meant. I have no "difficulty" with this concept since you just told me what I told you.

Ballons does not feel any wind speed, because they travel with the wind.

Balloons sure feel wind until they have reached equilibrium in their current fluid (IE takeoff). Changes again when they cross a weather front or hit a gust of wind.

Jupiter case! Tell me how do you would measure its rotation speed?

It does not have surface that we can measure..

However Jupiter is the planet that most fast rotates.. but the thing that rotates is the atmosphere.. "winds", in other words, the whole planet.

So you have many layers that you can call surface, and each layer has its constant distinctive speed. If you are in one of those layers, then you will feel the same as at earth, any difference on wind at that altitude is the thing you would call "wind".

But we have big difference in winds here at earth because our atmosphere is very thin and is very close to surface (terrain change winds the same as rocks in a river), you have clouds and different terrains which change the way you distribute the heat. Plus other factors that you dont find in big atmospheres.

You have it backwards. Winds exist due to a planet rotating. Planets do not rotate due to winds pushing them. To expand - look up Earth's trade winds. You will find many layers that contradict eachother. E-W at one latitude and W-E at a different. It does not matter how dense the atmosphere is for this to occur. Google search a picture of Jupiter . You will see vertical layers in the atmosphere. Those are Jupiter's "trade winds." Simply put, I don't care if we can measure a solid surface of Jupiter in the depths of its atmosphere. I know wind activity is occurring there. Our observations make it simply obvious.

So being in one of those atmosphere at any height, you would not feel winds or turbulances, if you do, they would be a lot more soft than fly at high altitud in ballon here on earth (which is still very soft).

Also when we enter in worlds, we always do it following the same direction of winds, so instead brake 8000 m/s, we need to brake 7600 m/s (earth´s winds that follow earth´s rotation).

Again, wind does not care what direction the planet is rotating. Show me one interplanetary mission launched years in advance that upon arrival from interplanetary speeds that wind direction upon arrival was less than a trivial issue. Show me one mission where they entered a retrograde orbit and landing that was based solely on wind conditions and not due to communications considerations for example (IE loss of comms on side of body not facing Earth). Spaceflight is an extension of flight and even today on Earth, pilots do not use weather predictions more than 2 hours in advance. I don't think we have weather stations out in the solar system giving us accurate predictions years into the future.

Still waiting for an answer to how I'm wrong about a 50m/s wind on Earth is different than a 50 m/s wind on a planet with a higher density atmosphere. There are physically more atoms hitting you.

[Bill Phil]

Weather is a big issue. It's about the difference in velocities and the time it takes and the masses and it's really complicated.

[Meecrob]

Ok, I can see that I was thinking about it the wrong way. I'll concede that point. I'd imagine that it would still be maneuvers made close in, relatively speaking to avoid the worst of the weather while long term forecasts predict seasons, etc? Apologies, AngelLestat, for speaking too quickly.

[Louella]

it might be possible for individuals to live on some other planets, but that's not the same as having a civilisation live on those planets.

I remember reading a thing, that said that when colonists from Europe, went to the high countries in South America, the women could not carry a pregnancy to term, because of the effect of altitude, to which the native peoples had adapted long ago.

which is a thing that is needed to have a civilisation - astronauts and planetary explorers can survive on a planet, but if you cant carry a pregnancy to term, and children can't develop properly, then that planet is uninhabitable.

[AngelLestat]

@AngelestatWe can't breathe a liquid. We don't have the organs to extract oxygen from it. The tiny things in the organs would be too saturated with liquid. So... None of that. And why would us breathing liquid increase internal pressure?

Our lungs can do the job. It all depends on how much oxygen the special liquid can carry. For example water can not carry enoght oxygen to allow us to breath.

Also this was done before in navy seals practice, with babies and adults under certain circustances, so is tested and it works.

Now about pressure, Solids and liquids are almost incompressible, gasses by other hand, are very compressible.

The only part of your body that will be affected by pressure if you breath air are lungs and ears.

The ears problem is easy to solve, simple, you can not avoid water to enter inside your ears, so that air chamber is gone..

Second problem are the lungs.

at 300mts the lungs had a size of 10% You can still breath (if you are a pro), but that is the limit.

If you have liquid rich in oxygen inside your lungs you can breath and the lungs will be at full size at any pressure.

Many of the big misconceptions on physsics comes when scientist try to call the viewer attentions using big numbers and wrong examples. Like here with my estimated Michio Kaku.

http://youtu.be/nf_mxmrDTV8?t=2m10s

The true is that he can not use the car example. Because you get equal pressure from each direcction over each molecule of your body.

Very different than had a truck over your chest when your molecules can move far from the wheel.

So is like try to crush a paper making pressure from both sides.

You have it backwards. Winds exist due to a planet rotating. Planets do not rotate due to winds pushing them.

well, that is not entirely true. Scientist believe that winds on venus are controling the planet rotation.

Venus is the only planet that rotates counter-clockwise at very low speed, is measure that the force that winds produce over the surface (92 atm constant 4m/s wind) is enoght to produce changes on the planet rotation over longer periods of time. Maybe venus rotation was as any other planet (maybe slower) but it change due winds.

Returning to the subject, winds depends on planet rotation and in thermal conditions.

To expand - look up Earth's trade winds. You will find many layers that contradict eachother. E-W at one latitude and W-E at a different. It does not matter how dense the atmosphere is for this to occur. Google search a picture of Jupiter . You will see vertical layers in the atmosphere. Those are Jupiter's "trade winds." Simply put, I don't care if we can measure a solid surface of Jupiter in the depths of its atmosphere. I know wind activity is occurring there. Our observations make it simply obvious.

Of course if you take the rotation planet speed as patron speed, then the difference is what we call "winds".

Ok, I can see that I was thinking about it the wrong way. I'll concede that point. I'd imagine that it would still be maneuvers made close in, relatively speaking to avoid the worst of the weather while long term forecasts predict seasons, etc? Apologies, AngelLestat, for speaking too quickly.

Some of the misconceptions comes with the wrong use of the word winds, I maybe help in that. We always had relative speeds from one object of study to the other.

it might be possible for individuals to live on some other planets, but that's not the same as having a civilisation live on those planets.

I remember reading a thing, that said that when colonists from Europe, went to the high countries in South America, the women could not carry a pregnancy to term, because of the effect of altitude, to which the native peoples had adapted long ago.

which is a thing that is needed to have a civilisation - astronauts and planetary explorers can survive on a planet, but if you cant carry a pregnancy to term, and children can't develop properly, then that planet is uninhabitable.

Yeah that is a strong factor, but I cant estimate in what conditions this may happen.

Edited January 29, 2015 by AngelLestat

[Bill Phil]

@Angelestat

Source?

Anyways, this magical liquid is very unlikely to exist naturally, and producing it on a large scale would just be plane dumb. Chances are that liquid would need to be very similar in compressibility to air, or viscosity or whatever. You can't just say it works and then use nonsense buzzwords. That's what it sounds like. Be technical, please. And you hardly addressed the pressure issue, please elaborate.

EDIT: Also, living and breathing are two very different things, what would the long term effects be? Has anyone studied that?

Edited January 29, 2015 by Bill Phil

[KerikBalm]

The atmospheres at different levels had different components which you can process.

None of which will contain any metals.

We practice with perlurocarbons... but is not the only substance that can carry oxygen.

Another substance that works is silicone oil. But they choose these because they are good for transport oxygen as co2. But if you search for only Oxygen rich liquids and you filter the co2 directly from one of your veins, then you have many candidates to choose. Maybe hydrogen peroxide.

#1) Neither of those compounds is going to naturally form in an environment, so as to constitute the majority of the liquid you'd be breathing in.

#2) Filtering your blood hardly makes it a habitable place.

No, from Argentina, here is called Cachalote. From the english wiki I had 2 names to choose.. Sperm whale and cachalot. So I made the obvious choose for me

But is breathing gases without problems on decompression sickness.

There is a reason that the english wikipedia link is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_whale

Anyway, yes it is the decompression that kills someone. Good luck finding a place where the pressure is that high, but the gas (or liquid) is breathable and at the right temperature.

Nothing is self-sufficient. The life support problems are being solved already for potential Mars missions and bases. Like most colonies, it will probably need regular deliveries of manufactured goods and tech. All it needs to produce in situ is oxygen and water. Doable on Jupiter and Saturn, and much easier on Uranus and Neptune.

Ummm... Earth is self sufficient...

Isn't the whole point of this thread about habitable places?

Why do you bring up mars as it currently is...? its not even in the atmospheric range he specifies: 0.2 to 100 atm

Humans survive on the moon too... Humans survive in submarines.

If we were just talking about some place we could put a habitat to temporarily support human life, then this thread would be quite pointless.

We know you can live in vacuums with the right equipment We know you can live at crushing pressures with the right equipment.

Neither of these constitute a habitable environment for humans.

We could live on Pluto too if the intent is to be forever dependant upon delivery of supplies made on Earth.

I don't think anyone has denied such a thing, its not a paradigmn shift.

Unless the colony can largely support itself, its stupid, because at some point, people on Earth are going to look at the economics, and that will be the end of that colony.

[problemecium]

Does it move at 460m/s plus 600m/s winds? Winds are always relative to the ground. Also, one must consider the density of the atmospheres. All the ones you mentioned are more dense than that of Earth's, meaning more mass is being accelerated towards you in their winds when compared to Earth.

I think his point is that humans can easily live on a plane going at 300 m/s, so if we simply build a base on Saturn or wherever that moves along with the wind, it should be rather peaceful inside as long as it doesn't hit anything overly turbulent like a storm. If I'm not mistaken, a lot of the winds on Saturn are fairly laminar, so if the wind is going 600 m/s and the base is also going 600 m/s, we should be fine as long as no idiot opens a window.

[Stargate525]

Ummm... Earth is self sufficient...

Isn't the whole point of this thread about habitable places?

Why do you bring up mars as it currently is...? its not even in the atmospheric range he specifies: 0.2 to 100 atm

Humans survive on the moon too... Humans survive in submarines.

If we were just talking about some place we could put a habitat to temporarily support human life, then this thread would be quite pointless.

We know you can live in vacuums with the right equipment We know you can live at crushing pressures with the right equipment.

Neither of these constitute a habitable environment for humans.

We could live on Pluto too if the intent is to be forever dependant upon delivery of supplies made on Earth.

I don't think anyone has denied such a thing, its not a paradigmn shift.

Unless the colony can largely support itself, its stupid, because at some point, people on Earth are going to look at the economics, and that will be the end of that colony.

*sigh* Yes, the entire planet as a whole is self-sufficient. But any smaller part of it is not. 18th century colonies required manufactured goods, and shipped raw resources back in trade. We're still doing it. We import oil, export finished goods. Lumber out, furniture in.

If you want to look at economics, that's what you do. Is there stuff on Jupiter/Saturn/Venus that Earth could use? Abso-frikkin-lutely. Hydrogen, which we'll need for fusion and rocket propellant. Helium, which is vanishingly rare on Earth and critical for supercooling. Methane, which is a semi-viable replacement for fossil fuels. Noble gasses, traces of nitrates... All sorts of stuff you can siphon from the air, bottle, and ship out.

And I brought up Mars because that's what most of our life-support tech is being bent towards for long-term habitation. That's a much harsher environment than what the OP is proposing, which in a few cases could be survivable with a breathing mask and hazmat suit. It's doable.

[AngelLestat]

Source?

Besides the 3 links that I show you in the first post, the wiki link that somebody else post and all the notes on internet?

You are a big boy, google does not bite.. Just search "breathing liquid" or "perfluorocarbon" or "navy seal", or any doubt that you must have.

Anyways, this magical liquid is very unlikely to exist naturally, and producing it on a large scale would just be plane dumb. Chances are that liquid would need to be very similar in compressibility to air, or viscosity or whatever. You can't just say it works and then use nonsense buzzwords. That's what it sounds like. Be technical, please. And you hardly addressed the pressure issue, please elaborate.

EDIT: Also, living and breathing are two very different things, what would the long term effects be? Has anyone studied that?

nonsense buzzwords??? I explain almost all details, I write as 30 lines for you. What else you want?

You wanna a note with studies confirming human test over a lifetime?? yeah I dont have those.. it may be health problems with long exposure or it may not.. I dont have any evidence pointing in any of those ways.

This is the same to ask: "show me evidence that you can cross interstellar distances without hit any rock." This lack of knowledge forbids us to talk about the posibility of interstellar travel? not really..

About to find it in naturally, is just carbon with flour, but as I said many times, they use this because is one of the best substances that can carry oxygen and co2, you have also silicato oils, etc.

But you can also use hydrogen peroxide or who knows how much combinations, if you filter your co2 from your veins.

And I never said that you will find that in enceladus, I was just picking the best scenary that I imagine. Just as an example that we need to be open to any possibility.

None of which will contain any metals.

true or not sure... In venus you might fine metals rain at 10 km height.

#1) Neither of those compounds is going to naturally form in an environment, so as to constitute the majority of the liquid you'd be breathing in.

2) Filtering your blood hardly makes it a habitable place.

1)We can not be sure about that, and we dont know yet of how many compunds are good carrying oxygen.

You have layers of other compunds in the oceans and caverns that looks like the water surface inside the water.

2) why not, just one vein as it show here:

http://www.independent.co.uk/migration_catalog/article5262850.ece/binary/original/DiverSuit.jpeg

Also if you dont like the enceladus special example, just choose other.

yesterday I read about a earth related discovery who help scientist to realized that a mars cavern could have liquid water and prosperous life due normal pressure -temperature levels plus radiation protection.

So as I said.. we need to think in 3D.

Anyway, yes it is the decompression that kills someone. Good luck finding a place where the pressure is that high, but the gas (or liquid) is breathable and at the right temperature.

Why the pressure needs to be so high? If you breath liquid, the pressure may be from aprox 0.5 to 100 atm or maybe more.

What I mean to said when I speak of high pressure with liquid breathing, is that it may be liquids that become good carrying oxygen at certain pressure. Which would increase the amount of compounds that may fulfill this scenary.

Why do you bring up mars as it currently is...? its not even in the atmospheric range he specifies: 0.2 to 100 atm

0.2 to 15 atm, higher than that is just for the liquid breathing case.

And mars has 0,006 atm

If we were just talking about some place we could put a habitat to temporarily support human life, then this thread would be quite pointless.

We know you can live in vacuums with the right equipment We know you can live at crushing pressures with the right equipment.

Neither of these constitute a habitable environment for humans.

And I brought up Mars because that's what most of our life-support tech is being bent towards for long-term habitation. That's a much harsher environment than what the OP is proposing, which in a few cases could be survivable with a breathing mask and hazmat suit. It's doable.

Yeah both had reason in these points.

What I wanted to change, is that global vision of "oh.. it has land.. it must be a good place".

We have that response because when we see mars, we are seeing just a picture of mars.. in other words, only our sense of sight.

But we have many other senses, the experience of all combined is what it guide us to said: "yeah.. this feels like home"

[Bill Phil]

You know Hydrogen Peroxide is dangerous right? Unless you mean low concentrations...

Half of what you say seems to be nonsense. I'm not trying to be insulting here. It literally seems like the adults from "Peanuts" to me.

Before going an claiming a "Paradigm Shift" we need to know all details about the "Shift" in question. We don't.

BTW, there are problems with transporting the fluid. We can't breathe liquid in our current state, but we could with help from mechanical devices ( such as CO2 scrubbers). We just can't pump enough liquid, it's too viscous.

Edited January 30, 2015 by Bill Phil