11 ms·

Venus does not have a molten core, and there is no magnetic field protecting the atmosphere from the solar winds. This is not likely the sole reason, but it mu

by chasil 1y ago

Venus does not have a molten core, and there is no magnetic field protecting the atmosphere from the solar winds. This is not likely the sole reason, but it must be a factor. Mercury does have a magnetic field, Mars does not.

pfdietz 1y ago
Venus is thought to have a (at least partially) molten core. It doesn't have a magnetic field, but that could be due to the slow rotation.
- kulahan 1y ago
  Could be for a million reasons honestly. Could’ve cooled too quickly or too slowly as well.
kulahan 1y ago
Mars, interestingly, was just determined to have a core almost identical to Earth’s as I understand it. This is not the sole determinant of course - you still need enough volatiles, enough gravity to maintain a hold on the lightest elements across billions of years, and tectonics to keep refreshing the atmosphere. Unfortunately for us all, Mars has none of those. There may be other significant factors as well.
- codq 1y ago
  Without tectonics, is terraforming Mars even possible as a long term solution? This "Mars colonization" strategy seems like a pipe dream, no?
  - SJC_Hacker 1y ago
    Tectonics isn’t the issue There would be little point in terraforming Mars. There’s plenty of places on Earth to terraform
    - dismalaf 1y ago
      The whole point of Mars (or any other second planet) is redundancy. If something happens to earth we have a backup plan, as a species.
      - fuzztester 1y ago
        >The whole point of Mars (or any other second planet) is redundancy. No. It's some combination of cowardice, greed and ego, by those involved. You can bet your ass those guys are not thinking about saving the species. Lol. Furthest thing from their minds. Solve the Earth's problems on Earth instead, no need to run off to Mars. That's just kicking the can down the road.
        dismalaf 1y ago
        > those guys Who do you think are "those guys"? Talking Musk? NASA? All the people who have dreamt of traveling the stars the last 100 years? Remember, we landed on the moon before Elon Musk was born. He's also not the first to talk about landing or living on Mars. And it's not to hedge against us destroying the planet. It's to hedge against an asteroid or other occurrence we can't control.
        ngcazz 1y ago
        Musk has a proven track record of using govt subsidies to fund companies to enrich himself immeasurably, and his Nazi turn proves that personal enrichment, not technological advancement, is what is at stake. I don't mean to be preachy but anyone who is providing support for the most racist and perfidious elements of society in Germany and the UK should be disavowed in the strongest terms.
        dismalaf 1y ago
        Wow Musk really lives rent free in your head eh? My comment literally about the fact that space travel predates Musk's ambitions by generations, and y'all just double down... Fun fact, the first person to mention colonising other planets is John Wilkens in the 17th century. I'm sure you'll find a way to connect that to Musk though. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_colonization https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_colonization
  - BlaDeKke 1y ago
    Was it ever anything else then a dream?
  - eru 1y ago
    The lack of tectonics would only be a problem if you want your terraforming to be 'one and done'. If you admit that terraforming, even after it's 'done', will require an ongoing maintenance effort, it's simple (but not easy). Eg you can use satellites to spin up an artificial magnetic field to shield against solar wind. However, I suspect terraforming planets is a waste. Far more bang for your buck to build habitats in space from scratch (eg out of asteroids), than to go down another gravity well. You can spin them for artificial 'gravity'. And you can situate them close to earth where logistics of resupply and communication and trade are much more favourable. Otherwise, Mercury is the planet to colonise, not Mars. Mercury gets extremely hot in the sun, and extremely cold at night. So if you dig a bit under the surface it all evens out. Pick the right latitude, and you can get basically any average temperature you feel like, including a comfortable 20C. (Otherwise, even on the surface it's easy to get comfy temperatures, if you bring retractable parasols. Just don't expect to stroll around outside the base.) Mercury has the benefit compared to Mars that solar power is extremely plentiful.
    - mixmastamyk 1y ago
      The Moon has zones like you describe on Mercury, and is a lot closer to colonize. Lack of large magnetic field probably won’t matter as terraforming either is hopeless.
      - eru 1y ago
        Yes, you can also do a similar strategy on the moon. You can in principle create artificial magnetic fields. But yeah, you are better off just staying indoors most of the time under a big fat layer of regolith.
    - kulahan 1y ago
      It's worth mentioning that one of the more sane ways to terraform a planet is to redirect specific comets to crash into the planet. It would be "free" in the sense that redirecting an orbit is already actively being studied by NASA for planetary defense reasons. To actually terraform a planet in this method would be unreasonably affordable compared to anything else I've ever heard. edit: Plus, it's nice to split our eggs into multiple planetary baskets. And I suspect people would feel a bit happier living on the surface of a chilly Mars than to become mole people on Mercury, even if it is easier. Maybe summer and winter homes?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  I've seen increasingly credible arguments that you also need a large satellite. To stabilise the planet's wobble. And, more importantly, create the sort of tidal cycles that prompt RNA worlds in the lab.
  - shrx 1y ago
    Where can I read more about the tidal cycles' influence on RNA synthesis?
riazrizvi 1y ago
First order the explanation is simply, Venus is a hellhole because of atmospheric greenhouse effect exacerbated by proximity to the sun.
AnimalMuppet 1y ago
Given Venus's atmospheric pressure, I'm not sure that "no magnetic field protecting the atmosphere" is a big part of the story. It's got plenty of atmosphere left.
echelon 1y ago
> no magnetic field protecting the atmosphere Venus has too much atmosphere. That's the problem.
- glenstein 1y ago
  A huge problem, it's also part of the solution. Venus protects itself from radiation even better than Earth due to its atmosphere.
lolive 1y ago
[Not to bore its audience, the Bible had to be brief on that part of the process, but] God iterated several version before delivering. Inner thought: here come the downvotes, baby!

by chasil 1y ago

pfdietz 1y ago

Venus is thought to have a (at least partially) molten core. It doesn't have a magnetic field, but that could be due to the slow rotation.

kulahan 1y ago
Could be for a million reasons honestly. Could’ve cooled too quickly or too slowly as well.

kulahan 1y ago

Mars, interestingly, was just determined to have a core almost identical to Earth’s as I understand it. This is not the sole determinant of course - you still need enough volatiles, enough gravity to maintain a hold on the lightest elements across billions of years, and tectonics to keep refreshing the atmosphere. Unfortunately for us all, Mars has none of those. There may be other significant factors as well.

codq 1y ago
Without tectonics, is terraforming Mars even possible as a long term solution? This "Mars colonization" strategy seems like a pipe dream, no?
- SJC_Hacker 1y ago
  Tectonics isn’t the issue There would be little point in terraforming Mars. There’s plenty of places on Earth to terraform
  - dismalaf 1y ago
    The whole point of Mars (or any other second planet) is redundancy. If something happens to earth we have a backup plan, as a species.
    - fuzztester 1y ago
      >The whole point of Mars (or any other second planet) is redundancy. No. It's some combination of cowardice, greed and ego, by those involved. You can bet your ass those guys are not thinking about saving the species. Lol. Furthest thing from their minds. Solve the Earth's problems on Earth instead, no need to run off to Mars. That's just kicking the can down the road.
      - dismalaf 1y ago
        > those guys Who do you think are "those guys"? Talking Musk? NASA? All the people who have dreamt of traveling the stars the last 100 years? Remember, we landed on the moon before Elon Musk was born. He's also not the first to talk about landing or living on Mars. And it's not to hedge against us destroying the planet. It's to hedge against an asteroid or other occurrence we can't control.
        ngcazz 1y ago
        Musk has a proven track record of using govt subsidies to fund companies to enrich himself immeasurably, and his Nazi turn proves that personal enrichment, not technological advancement, is what is at stake. I don't mean to be preachy but anyone who is providing support for the most racist and perfidious elements of society in Germany and the UK should be disavowed in the strongest terms.
        dismalaf 1y ago
        Wow Musk really lives rent free in your head eh? My comment literally about the fact that space travel predates Musk's ambitions by generations, and y'all just double down... Fun fact, the first person to mention colonising other planets is John Wilkens in the 17th century. I'm sure you'll find a way to connect that to Musk though. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_colonization https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_colonization
- BlaDeKke 1y ago
  Was it ever anything else then a dream?
- eru 1y ago
  The lack of tectonics would only be a problem if you want your terraforming to be 'one and done'. If you admit that terraforming, even after it's 'done', will require an ongoing maintenance effort, it's simple (but not easy). Eg you can use satellites to spin up an artificial magnetic field to shield against solar wind. However, I suspect terraforming planets is a waste. Far more bang for your buck to build habitats in space from scratch (eg out of asteroids), than to go down another gravity well. You can spin them for artificial 'gravity'. And you can situate them close to earth where logistics of resupply and communication and trade are much more favourable. Otherwise, Mercury is the planet to colonise, not Mars. Mercury gets extremely hot in the sun, and extremely cold at night. So if you dig a bit under the surface it all evens out. Pick the right latitude, and you can get basically any average temperature you feel like, including a comfortable 20C. (Otherwise, even on the surface it's easy to get comfy temperatures, if you bring retractable parasols. Just don't expect to stroll around outside the base.) Mercury has the benefit compared to Mars that solar power is extremely plentiful.
  - mixmastamyk 1y ago
    The Moon has zones like you describe on Mercury, and is a lot closer to colonize. Lack of large magnetic field probably won’t matter as terraforming either is hopeless.
    - eru 1y ago
      Yes, you can also do a similar strategy on the moon. You can in principle create artificial magnetic fields. But yeah, you are better off just staying indoors most of the time under a big fat layer of regolith.
  - kulahan 1y ago
    It's worth mentioning that one of the more sane ways to terraform a planet is to redirect specific comets to crash into the planet. It would be "free" in the sense that redirecting an orbit is already actively being studied by NASA for planetary defense reasons. To actually terraform a planet in this method would be unreasonably affordable compared to anything else I've ever heard. edit: Plus, it's nice to split our eggs into multiple planetary baskets. And I suspect people would feel a bit happier living on the surface of a chilly Mars than to become mole people on Mercury, even if it is easier. Maybe summer and winter homes?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
I've seen increasingly credible arguments that you also need a large satellite. To stabilise the planet's wobble. And, more importantly, create the sort of tidal cycles that prompt RNA worlds in the lab.
- shrx 1y ago
  Where can I read more about the tidal cycles' influence on RNA synthesis?

riazrizvi 1y ago

First order the explanation is simply, Venus is a hellhole because of atmospheric greenhouse effect exacerbated by proximity to the sun.

AnimalMuppet 1y ago

Given Venus's atmospheric pressure, I'm not sure that "no magnetic field protecting the atmosphere" is a big part of the story. It's got plenty of atmosphere left.

echelon 1y ago

> no magnetic field protecting the atmosphere Venus has too much atmosphere. That's the problem.

glenstein 1y ago
A huge problem, it's also part of the solution. Venus protects itself from radiation even better than Earth due to its atmosphere.

lolive 1y ago

[Not to bore its audience, the Bible had to be brief on that part of the process, but] God iterated several version before delivering. Inner thought: here come the downvotes, baby!