• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Raduprv

My futuristic idea about colonizing Mars and Venus

100 posts in this topic

As you know, Nasa is planning to send humans on Mars in 2050 or so. Mars suffers from not enough atmosphere. If it had a denser atmosphere (especially greenhouse gases such as methane and CO2) the temperature there would be warmer, and the pressue would be better suited for life forms. On the other hand, Venus has a lot of CO2, and the pressure and temperature are too much for known life forms (especially for humans). For the time being we do not have the technology to do this, but with the advancements in nano technology and new materials, wouldn't it be possible in the future (maybe 500 years from now) to build some very elastic and flexible pipe between those two planets, and pump the CO2 from Venus to Mars? If we could manage to do that, both Mars and Venus would have a climate pretty close to the one on Earth, so we could colonize them without building space domes and stuff like that. We could directly walk on their surface, without any protective gear.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by visage
Or, for the next 50 years, we could just send our smog to Mars. I like that idea more.


Yeah, if we could pack it nicely and transport it there :)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. Due to problems in the core of Mars itself, it would not be able to sustain an atmosphere.

--edit--

Also, that pipe would cost more to build and maintain than constant round trips between the planets.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
now where'd you find enuff material to build such a long yet flexible tube that'd be large enought not to take eons to pump the atmothphere?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This won't work. It would work if....
Both mars and venus orbited the sun in sync.
You could manufacture a hose that was millions of kilometres long.
You could manufacture pumps strong enough to transfer atmosphere from one planet to another.
WE could breathe acid, since that's what the atmosphere of venus is.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not really understand nano technology, but from what I think I know, the ability for it to reshape molecules, and basically make anything from anything by rearanging it, surly if we send some nanites? (thats what they are called in some sci fi shows?) then would they be able to restructure the atmosphere in to whatever it is needed?

from what I saw on a scifi show, viable nano tech would be available in less than 20 years, someone said they have the ability to do it now, but they have no proof.

frankly I think it would be good but not allowed, if terrorists get them, or basically anyone who it is not intended, they could make genecide really easy... on the other hand, if they are used properally, it could be a golden age! (well if I had some, it would be a diamond age here! only joking!)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by wilhil
I do not really understand nano technology, but from what I think I know, the ability for it to reshape molecules, and basically make anything from anything by rearanging it, surly if we send some nanites? (thats what they are called in some sci fi shows?) then would they be able to restructure the atmosphere in to whatever it is needed?

from what I saw on a scifi show, viable nano tech would be available in less than 20 years, someone said they have the ability to do it now, but they have no proof.

frankly I think it would be good but not allowed, if terrorists get them, or basically anyone who it is not intended, they could make genecide really easy... on the other hand, if they are used properally, it could be a golden age! (well if I had some, it would be a diamond age here! only joking!)


Quote:
Original post by Raduprv
As you know, Nasa is planning to send humans on Mars in 2050 or so.
Mars suffers from not enough atmosphere. If it had a denser atmosphere (especially greenhouse gases such as methane and CO2) the temperature there would be warmer, and the pressue would be better suited for life forms.

On the other hand, Venus has a lot of CO2, and the pressure and temperature are too much for known life forms (especially for humans).

For the time being we do not have the technology to do this, but with the advancements in nano technology and new materials, wouldn't it be possible in the future (maybe 500 years from now) to build some very elastic and flexible pipe between those two planets, and pump the CO2 from Venus to Mars?
If we could manage to do that, both Mars and Venus would have a climate pretty close to the one on Earth, so we could colonize them without building space domes and stuff like that. We could directly walk on their surface, without any protective gear.


Hi, I'm Daniel Grinton, but most of you know me as AnonymousPosterChild or "That jackass who keeps posting on gamedev." I'm here to talk to you all about a serious issue that plagues us all:

The lack of proper funding and classes in our public schools.

As you can see in the 2 above posts, neither of these children have any idea what they're talking about. This needs to end. Please consider making a cash donation to your local schools. We need to eliminate this sort of ignorance once and for all.

Thank you for your time.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Excuse me, but I started by saying I dont know much about nano tech, and everything that I was talking about, I saw on the discovery chanel last night, I thought it was a joke, but they were going on about nano tech and how it would soon be available.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Raduprv
[...] build some very elastic and flexible pipe between those two planets, and pump the CO2 from Venus to Mars? [...]

This is the funniest thing I've read for the whole day.
Rating++ for the good joke.

Quote:
Original post by Vanke
This won't work. It would work if....
Both mars and venus orbited the sun in sync.
You could manufacture a hose that was millions of kilometres long.
You could manufacture pumps strong enough to transfer atmosphere from one planet to another.
WE could breathe acid, since that's what the atmosphere of venus is.

You forgot the part where Earth would cross that pipe :D
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by AnonymousPosterChild
Hi, I'm Daniel Grinton, but most of you know me as AnonymousPosterChild or "That jackass who keeps posting on gamedev." I'm here to talk to you all about a serious issue that plagues us all:

The lack of proper funding and classes in our public schools.

As you can see in the 2 above posts, neither of these children have any idea what they're talking about. This needs to end. Please consider making a cash donation to your local schools. We need to eliminate this sort of ignorance once and for all.

Thank you for your time.


And perhaps you can enlighten us with your unsurpassed wisdom, to why this wouldn't work?

BTW, nano technology (among other things) means just engineering materials at an atomic level, like the carbon nanotubes for examples.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Pouya
You forgot the part where Earth would cross that pipe :D


Did I say that we would anchor the pipe on both planets? It can be left in a certain area, near the space where the planets are closest, then when they get close again next time, you just anchor them for a while, and start pumping.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Raduprv
Quote:
Original post by AnonymousPosterChild
Hi, I'm Daniel Grinton, but most of you know me as AnonymousPosterChild or "That jackass who keeps posting on gamedev." I'm here to talk to you all about a serious issue that plagues us all:

The lack of proper funding and classes in our public schools.

As you can see in the 2 above posts, neither of these children have any idea what they're talking about. This needs to end. Please consider making a cash donation to your local schools. We need to eliminate this sort of ignorance once and for all.

Thank you for your time.


And perhaps you can enlighten us with your unsurpassed wisdom, to why this wouldn't work?

BTW, nano technology (among other things) means just engineering materials at an atomic level, like the carbon nanotubes for examples.


Okay.

1. The pipe itself would need to constantly be changing positions over and over again, including serveral twists around the sun. Not only would this require massive amounts of power, but the engineering would be awful.

2. You'd need to set up massive pumps in a geostationary orbit around each planet, and these pumps would need to move with the pipe in order to keep a steady flow of gas.

3. We lack the materials nessecary for such an undertaking. We're still wrapping our heads around space elevators for christ's sake.

4. From wikipedia:
Quote:

The lack of a magnetosphere surrounding Mars may have allowed the solar wind to erode the atmosphere, the relatively low gravity of Mars helping to accelerate the loss of lighter gases to space. The lack of plate tectonics on Mars is another possibility, preventing the recycling of gases locked up in sediments back into the atmosphere. The lack of magnetic field and geologic activity may both be a result of Mars' smaller size allowing its interior to cool more quickly than Earth's, though the details of such processes are still unrealised.


So now we know that Mars cant even HOLD an atmosphere. Yeah, good plan.

5. Why not use geodesic domes? They're cheaper, easier to maintain that a several hundred million mile pipe, and a hell of a lot cheaper.

6. Debris will be an issue too. This pipe is going to twist along a lot of orbits, and will intersect with a lot of debris paths. This would tear the pipe apart.

7. A pipe is a stupid idea anyways. It'd be a hell of a lot easier to make a fleet of ships and have them run between transfer orbits. Ships can alter course to make sure they dont run into larger debris, we can easily make them in large numbers, as opposed to a giant pipe, and they'd be able to run actual supplies to and from each planet.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Raduprv
Quote:
Original post by Pouya
You forgot the part where Earth would cross that pipe :D


Did I say that we would anchor the pipe on both planets? It can be left in a certain area, near the space where the planets are closest, then when they get close again next time, you just anchor them for a while, and start pumping.


Problems:

1. Now you've got a system that can only work when the planets align. This only happens every... fuck, I'll have to do the math later. Let me put it this way, you've not got a system that can only work when the planets are on just the right orbit, will not be able to pump long enough to transfer any materials, and will only function when the planets are on the right rotation.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by AnonymousPosterChild
1. The pipe itself would need to constantly be changing positions over and over again, including serveral twists around the sun. Not only would this require massive amounts of power, but the engineering would be awful.

Well, yeah, I never said it would be easy or cheap or even doable with the current technology.

Quote:

2. You'd need to set up massive pumps in a geostationary orbit around each planet, and these pumps would need to move with the pipe in order to keep a steady flow of gas.

See the above answer.

Quote:

3. We lack the materials nessecary for such an undertaking. We're still wrapping our heads around space elevators for christ's sake.

Again, see the previous answer.

Quote:

4. From wikipedia:
Quote:

The lack of a magnetosphere surrounding Mars may have allowed the solar wind to erode the atmosphere, the relatively low gravity of Mars helping to accelerate the loss of lighter gases to space. The lack of plate tectonics on Mars is another possibility, preventing the recycling of gases locked up in sediments back into the atmosphere. The lack of magnetic field and geologic activity may both be a result of Mars' smaller size allowing its interior to cool more quickly than Earth's, though the details of such processes are still unrealised.

We don't know for sure if Mars ever had an atmosphere (bigger than the one it has today)
The gravity not being enough, that's BS, Titan has an atmosphere, right?

Quote:

So now we know that Mars cant even HOLD an atmosphere. Yeah, good plan.

Oh, we KNOW? What a definite answer we have here. Any proofs? Notice how the Wikipedia article uses the term "may have allowed".

Quote:

5. Why not use geodesic domes? They're cheaper, easier to maintain that a several hundred million mile pipe, and a hell of a lot cheaper.

How would they transport the gas?

Quote:

6. Debris will be an issue too. This pipe is going to twist along a lot of orbits, and will intersect with a lot of debris paths. This would tear the pipe apart.

Yes, but by that time we might have stronger materials.

Quote:

7. A pipe is a stupid idea anyways. It'd be a hell of a lot easier to make a fleet of ships and have them run between transfer orbits. Ships can alter course to make sure they dont run into larger debris, we can easily make them in large numbers, as opposed to a giant pipe, and they'd be able to run actual supplies to and from each planet.


Yes, that is another posibility, but I am not sure if we could ever have so many ships to transport that much atmosphere.

BTW, I bet that if you would have told someone 500 years ago about how in the future we'll have transatlantic fiber optics networks, that person would have laughed his ass off.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by AnonymousPosterChild
5. Why not use geodesic domes? They're cheaper, easier to maintain that a several hundred million mile pipe, and a hell of a lot cheaper.


You used cheaper twice. Lol.

It was just a Idea they had, abad idea but a idea none the less. Don't be so hard on them, anom.

My two & a half cents:
By the time we have such tecnology hopefully we would be able to shift to a different point in space/time and then just find other planets like earth instead of trying to make them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Raduprv
Quote:
Original post by AnonymousPosterChild
1. The pipe itself would need to constantly be changing positions over and over again, including serveral twists around the sun. Not only would this require massive amounts of power, but the engineering would be awful.

Well, yeah, I never said it would be easy or cheap or even doable with the current technology.

Quote:

2. You'd need to set up massive pumps in a geostationary orbit around each planet, and these pumps would need to move with the pipe in order to keep a steady flow of gas.

See the above answer.

Quote:

3. We lack the materials nessecary for such an undertaking. We're still wrapping our heads around space elevators for christ's sake.

Again, see the previous answer.


And? Even in the future it would be a dumb idea, since there are better, cheaper alternatives.

Quote:

Quote:

4. From wikipedia:
Quote:

The lack of a magnetosphere surrounding Mars may have allowed the solar wind to erode the atmosphere, the relatively low gravity of Mars helping to accelerate the loss of lighter gases to space. The lack of plate tectonics on Mars is another possibility, preventing the recycling of gases locked up in sediments back into the atmosphere. The lack of magnetic field and geologic activity may both be a result of Mars' smaller size allowing its interior to cool more quickly than Earth's, though the details of such processes are still unrealised.

We don't know for sure if Mars ever had an atmosphere (bigger than the one it has today)
The gravity not being enough, that's BS, Titan has an atmosphere, right?


Same article:
"Indeed, it is thought that Mars once did have a relatively Earthlike environment early in its history, with a thicker atmosphere and abundant water that was lost over the course of hundreds of millions of years."

As for the Titan thing, there are a LOT more factors at work there than just gravity. And who am I going to believe, respected astronomers, or some idiot who wants to build a giant pipe?

Quote:

Quote:

So now we know that Mars cant even HOLD an atmosphere. Yeah, good plan.

Oh, we KNOW? What a definite answer we have here. Any proofs? Notice how the Wikipedia article uses the term "may have allowed".


Semantics != argument

Quote:

Quote:

5. Why not use geodesic domes? They're cheaper, easier to maintain that a several hundred million mile pipe, and a hell of a lot cheaper.

How would they transport the gas?


I already touched on this with my fleet transfer orbit statement.

Quote:

Quote:

6. Debris will be an issue too. This pipe is going to twist along a lot of orbits, and will intersect with a lot of debris paths. This would tear the pipe apart.

Yes, but by that time we might have stronger materials.


If its and buts were candy and nuts...

Quote:

Quote:

7. A pipe is a stupid idea anyways. It'd be a hell of a lot easier to make a fleet of ships and have them run between transfer orbits. Ships can alter course to make sure they dont run into larger debris, we can easily make them in large numbers, as opposed to a giant pipe, and they'd be able to run actual supplies to and from each planet.


Yes, that is another posibility, but I am not sure if we could ever have so many ships to transport that much atmosphere.


We arent limited by size when we build in orbit, not to mention the fact that unlike in a pipe, we could compress the gas.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by AnonymousPosterChild
Same article:
"Indeed, it is thought that Mars once did have a relatively Earthlike environment early in its history, with a thicker atmosphere and abundant water that was lost over the course of hundreds of millions of years."

I think you should go back to school and learn the English language, because apparently you can not understand that "it is thought" is different than "we know for sure".

Quote:

As for the Titan thing, there are a LOT more factors at work there than just gravity. And who am I going to believe, respected astronomers, or some idiot who wants to build a giant pipe?

See, you can spot an idiot when instead of using logic arguments he starts usign ad hominem attacks.
Believe the respect astronomers on WHAT?


Quote:

Semantics != argument


So for you "we believe" is just another way of saying "we know for sure". I see.

Quote:

If its and buts were candy and nuts...


Which is pertinent to the current conversation. I see.


Quote:

We arent limited by size when we build in orbit, not to mention the fact that unlike in a pipe, we could compress the gas.


And the compression magically makes the mass less?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Raduprv
Quote:

We arent limited by size when we build in orbit, not to mention the fact that unlike in a pipe, we could compress the gas.


And the compression magically makes the mass less?


Transfer orbits are great because they don't require the ship to provide any thrust, its all done by the gravitational pull of the other planets. The only mass you'll need to worry about is in the braking mechanism. Compression doesnt decrease mass, but it decreases size.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Raduprv, you have to be the most stubborn GDNet poster I know of. I think you need to admit defeat and move on once in a while.

You present an idea (subject it to criticism), it turns out to be a bad idea. You continue to defend it, but the more you try to defend it, the weaker it becomes. You do this to yourself all the time here.

It is perfectly fine to present an idea and have it proved illogical, or to revise a bad idea based on criticism, but to defend an inherently flawed idea so vehemently is silly.

It frustrates me because you seem like a nice guy and one whom shouldn't squander all his time on such things.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by wilhil
Excuse me, but I started by saying I dont know much about nano tech, and everything that I was talking about, I saw on the discovery chanel last night, I thought it was a joke, but they were going on about nano tech and how it would soon be available.


You might find this article interesting: Everything you always wanted to know about nanotechnology... But were too afraid of quantum spookiness to ask. You have to watch a brief advert to get to the article, but it's worth it. And then you can read this article on some of the potential applications of nanotech: The (really scary) soldier of the future. Thanks to nanotechnology, he'll be a lethal superman who can heal himself..


As for the rest of the thread - try to exercise a greater degree of diplomacy please.

//edit - as far as terraforming Mars goes, a magnetosphere is needed to protect the atmosphere from solar winds per the wikiquote. That would mean getting the core of the planet to spin and that kind of technology is centuries beyond us.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by odiousangel
Raduprv, you have to be the most stubborn GDNet poster I know of. I think you need to admit defeat and move on once in a while.

You present an idea (subject it to criticism), it turns out to be a bad idea. You continue to defend it, but the more you try to defend it, the weaker it becomes. You do this to yourself all the time here.

It is perfectly fine to present an idea and have it proved illogical, or to revise a bad idea based on criticism, but to defend an inherently flawed idea so vehemently is silly.

It frustrates me because you seem like a nice guy and one whom shouldn't squander all his time on such things.


Hey, I am not asking for your money to do it, now do I? :D
All the great inventions were met with laughter and distrust. A little over 100 years ago, people would laugh if you'd tell them you are going to build some device that is capable of liftoff. Telling them you are planing to build a space ship to go on the moon and back would have sounded even more ridiculous.

Another thing to keep in mind is that in a few hundred years, we might have the techology to move the planets away from their orbits, so we could place Venus and Mars close together, effectively limiting the inherent problems with this long pipe between them.
Now I am not saying how we could move the planets, but we have the sun that is a huge and virtually infinite source of energy. We also have billions of years ahead of us, unless we do something really stupid and destroy ourselves in the process.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by AnonymousPosterChild
Transfer orbits are great because they don't require the ship to provide any thrust, its all done by the gravitational pull of the other planets. The only mass you'll need to worry about is in the braking mechanism. Compression doesnt decrease mass, but it decreases size.


But you still need some energy to accelerate away from Venus and head to Mars. You also need some energy to head in the right direction. Breaking might not be necesary, since if the ship is cheap, you can just crash it on Mars.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Raduprv
Quote:
Original post by AnonymousPosterChild
Transfer orbits are great because they don't require the ship to provide any thrust, its all done by the gravitational pull of the other planets. The only mass you'll need to worry about is in the braking mechanism. Compression doesnt decrease mass, but it decreases size.


But you still need some energy to accelerate away from Venus and head to Mars. You also need some energy to head in the right direction. Breaking might not be necesary, since if the ship is cheap, you can just crash it on Mars.


Re-usable ships in this case, would be cheaper, unlike reuseable shuttles. And as far as transfer orbits go, this one is pretty low power:

Quote:

The Interplanetary Superhighway has come to denote a set of transfer orbits between various planets and moons in the solar system. These transfers have particularly low delta-v requirements, and appear to be the lowest energy transfers, even lower than the common Hohmann transfer orbit that has dominated orbital dynamics in the past.

...

If a spacecraft placed at the L1 point is given even a slight nudge towards the Moon, for instance, the Moon's gravity will now be greater and the spacecraft will be pulled away from the L1 point. The entire system is in motion, so the spacecraft will not actually hit the Moon, but will travel in a winding path off into space.

...

The transfers are so low-energy that they make travel to almost any point in the solar system possible. On the downside, these transfers are very slow, and only useful for automated probes.


I've dealt with these simulations before in Orbiter. With a bit of work, I could easily expand it to deal with large scale automated vessels.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's another thought. By the time we are able to terraform Mars we will likely have figured out how to build fusion reactors and therefore how to transform the materials on Mars to make the elements needed to terraform it. So instead of transporting CO2 from Venus, it would make more sense to use a fusion reactor to create it inplace.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0