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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.