3 ms·

The fourth photo is Olympus Mons, not a volcano on Mars; it is the volcano on Mars. I'm sure a lot of you know this, however reminding myself of how big this pe

The fourth photo is Olympus Mons, not a volcano on Mars; it is the volcano on Mars. I'm sure a lot of you know this, however reminding myself of how big this peak is is always breathtaking. A hypothetical ascent in our future would be the single largest climbing feat human kind ever could undertake in our known solar system [0]. Mt. Everest is 8,848.86 m (29,032 ft) [1]. Mauna Kea (assuming you're climbing from the local bottom of the ocean is 9,330 m (30,610 ft) [2]. Olympus Mons' prominence is 21,900 m (71,850 feet 4.724 inches) [3]. Try climbing Everest, twice, where the entire mountain (and planet) is the "death zone" and your supplies have to be flown in from one planet over. Edit: Also! For a sense of scale, the crater in the photo is 85 km (53 miles) in diameter [4]. About the distance from the Taco Bell in Half Moon Bay to the Taco Bell just east of Santa Cruz as the crow flies [5]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_mountains_in_the_Solar_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_mountains_in_t... [1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20201208113343/https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/12/new-height-of-mount-everest-announced-by-china-and-nepal/ https://web.archive.org/web/20201208113343/https://www.natio... [2]: http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/ds_mark.prl?PidBox=TU2314 http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/ds_mark.prl?PidBox=TU2314 [3]: https://tharsis.gsfc.nasa.gov/mola.summary.pdf https://tharsis.gsfc.nasa.gov/mola.summary.pdf [4]: https://www.britannica.com/place/Olympus-Mons https://www.britannica.com/place/Olympus-Mons [5]: https://www.gaiagps.com/map/?loc=8.6/-122.6459/37.2976&pubLink=xmWdyjzEsDYkRqznmMkl8WUQ&areaId=48176bc2-ecfb-4d23-8994-fcf244f47697 https://www.gaiagps.com/map/?loc=8.6/-122.6459/37.2976&pubLi...

BurningFrog 2y ago
You also need to factor in that Mars has 1/3 of Earth gravity. I have no experience in low gravity climbing, but it has to be a substantial help!
- samschooler 2y ago
  Interesting take! I feel like factoring that in: - low gravity: -1 difficulty - less traction because low gravity: +1 difficulty - supply chain from earth: +1 difficulty - full spacesuit in addition to supplies: +1 difficulty So overall my pseudo math: +2 difficulty
  - vernon99 2y ago
    It has a very low slope angle of about 5%, so it would be really more like a hike, esp in such low gravity. Unlike Mt Everest, a mountain formed by a collision of tectonic plates, Olympic is a shield volcano and they are the opposite to mountains in terms of slope angles.
- renewiltord 2y ago
  Considering it's a really old and wide shield volcano, the limiting factor can't be the 'climb' so to speak. Surely it's traction so perhaps lower gravity is worse? On the other hand you _can_ bound up it. Still, I can't help but think we'd be traction limited in some sense. Usain Bolt would probably be about the same time considering he can't push down enough, I imagine. Would be cool to estimate.
  - BurningFrog 2y ago
    Are you saying the terrain is more gravel/sand than solid rock?
    - renewiltord 2y ago
      I was just thinking about the gravitational force providing traction to go forward.
      - BurningFrog 2y ago
        Aha. I didn't even consider that could be a factor. You may well be right. I do know, after having walked up many a high mountain, that a major pain point is the gained altitude. You're lifting your body weight several kilometers up! Distance walked is a much smaller factor.

BurningFrog 2y ago

You also need to factor in that Mars has 1/3 of Earth gravity. I have no experience in low gravity climbing, but it has to be a substantial help!

samschooler 2y ago
Interesting take! I feel like factoring that in: - low gravity: -1 difficulty - less traction because low gravity: +1 difficulty - supply chain from earth: +1 difficulty - full spacesuit in addition to supplies: +1 difficulty So overall my pseudo math: +2 difficulty
- vernon99 2y ago
  It has a very low slope angle of about 5%, so it would be really more like a hike, esp in such low gravity. Unlike Mt Everest, a mountain formed by a collision of tectonic plates, Olympic is a shield volcano and they are the opposite to mountains in terms of slope angles.
renewiltord 2y ago
Considering it's a really old and wide shield volcano, the limiting factor can't be the 'climb' so to speak. Surely it's traction so perhaps lower gravity is worse? On the other hand you _can_ bound up it. Still, I can't help but think we'd be traction limited in some sense. Usain Bolt would probably be about the same time considering he can't push down enough, I imagine. Would be cool to estimate.
- BurningFrog 2y ago
  Are you saying the terrain is more gravel/sand than solid rock?
  - renewiltord 2y ago
    I was just thinking about the gravitational force providing traction to go forward.
    - BurningFrog 2y ago
      Aha. I didn't even consider that could be a factor. You may well be right. I do know, after having walked up many a high mountain, that a major pain point is the gained altitude. You're lifting your body weight several kilometers up! Distance walked is a much smaller factor.