4 ms·

Without massive terraforming all of Mars is very hostile. But having solid ground is still nice. A workable compromise is making big habitats in a dome, that

by lukan 6mo ago

Without massive terraforming all of Mars is very hostile. But having solid ground is still nice. A workable compromise is making big habitats in a dome, that gives sunlight, but shields from radiation. And the ground needs to be processed obviously. The advantage of Venus to me is is gravity.

nradov 6mo ago
Which dome construction material would be transparent to sunlight but block ionizing radiation?
- LorenPechtel 6mo ago
  1) Why do you need sunlight? 2) If you have a source of hydrogen: water. Bonus as you don't have to make the dome hold pressure. A layer of water of the right depth will generate the force needed, the structure only needs to keep itself level. The only pressure holding is outside that, enough to keep the water from boiling. And, well, it's water--if it's hit by a rock that isn't too big you'll just have hole in the top layer, easily fixed. The same general idea would work on the Moon but the water is far from transparent if you pile up enough of it and you need a lot of hydrogen.
  - lukan 6mo ago
    Well, I did wrote "gives sunlight" and that is a valid reply to it. But ... I would need sunlight actually. That seems somewhat possible with light tubes, but the much nicer solution, a transparent dome to still see mars clouds at day and the stars at night, is indeed not possible with current materials.
cosmic_cheese 6mo ago
Gravity kind of cuts both ways. Closer to that of Earth is nearly guaranteed to be better for long term human health, but there's a possibility that martian gravity is "good enough" when supplemented with excercise while also making heavy operations and getting back out of the planet's gravity well easier.
cduzz 6mo ago
Venus seems like a wonderful place to live, relatively speaking. At the right altitude where you can "float" on the ocean, it's a pretty comfortable temperature and there's plenty of solar energy but you're shielded from the solar radiation. So, long term, your body will still work, assuming you can solve "the other problems." Of course, the down-side is that there's nothing to stand on and probably more importantly, there aren't many useful materials to work with besides tons of carbon, oxygen, and nitrogen. Not much hydrogen there, so not much water, which probably is the biggest problem. One of them, anyhow. Also, there's probably not a whole lot to do besides float (zoom, actually) around and slowly go stir crazy in your bubble. But relatively speaking, it's way nicer than living in a hole on mars where you'll slowly die from gravity sickness, or radiation poisoning, or whatever.
- jcranmer 6mo ago
  > Not much hydrogen there, so not much water, which probably is the biggest problem. Actually, the cloud layer at that level is mostly sulfuric acid, from which you can get your water. It also means you need to be in a hazmat suit when you walk outside, but that's still a step up from everywhere else, where you need a bulky pressure suit instead.
operatingthetan 6mo ago
If we terraform mars, isn't the dirt still toxic?
- lukan 6mo ago
  No, as terraforming means changing that. Whether it is really possible, is a different question, but after you have an atmosphere, you could have engineered microorganism processing the soil etc.
  - operatingthetan 6mo ago
    In that sense then the term "terraforming" is on equal footing with alchemy.
    - fylo 6mo ago
      [flagged]
    - wolvoleo 6mo ago
      Doing something like that at planetary scale is science fiction anyway even if we did have the tech to do it.
      - naravara 6mo ago
        If you can kick off self-sustaining biological processes it’ll happen on its own eventually, but you’d just be looking at generational time scales to do it. Of course you’ll probably have lots of side-effects.
        jodrellblank 6mo ago
        How do we do that? I imagine dumping Earth life on Mars it will just die. What if we buried a terrarium at the Martian pole with a radio isotope and solar heater and controls so that it could try growing bacteria inside and controlled-leaking some outside into a nearby warm (liquid water) surroundings, and that could get many chances to evolve strains that could survive further away - analogous to ocean life around deep hydrothermal vents. Anyone know of speculative plans of this sort?
tarr11 6mo ago
I wonder if it will turn out to be easier to adapt lifeforms to the planets than to try to adapt the planets to the lifeforms.
- lukan 6mo ago
  Both probably, but you cannot really adapt life to no water and hard radiation. (at most sustain it in stasis, but not growing)
- SoftTalker 6mo ago
  Neither is realistic; living on the Moon or Mars or any other planet is a fantasy.
  - SecretDreams 6mo ago
    This is the thinking of someone on the timescales of a single life. If humanity persists another 1000 years on our current trajectory (US/world politics not withstanding), I think nothing is really a fantasy. Rather, it's all possible but maybe just not in our own lifetimes. But it is also terribly difficult for us to plan for tomorrow, let alone for a future where our descendants are at the helm.
    - fellowmartian 6mo ago
      I agree, it’s just a failure of imagination. Some folks correctly foresee not being able to continue what we’re doing now in the exact same way in some new context and conclude everything is impossible. Life isn’t this fickle, it’s adapted before and will adapt again. This is why great science fiction is so valuable, as some people are better at imagining new ways of being more than others, and can show the rest of us the possibilities.
      - jiggawatts 6mo ago
        The counterargument is a simple opportunity cost calculation: There will never, ever, ever[1] be a scenario where if you weighed up the options of "expand into some less habitable area of the Earth" versus "expand to Mars", the latter is the better option either 1) financially, or b) quality of life. Nobody[2] ever picks the dramatically more expensive and dramatically worse option! Also, people that are desperate enough to even consider living in the least desirable -- but still just barely habitable -- parts of planet Earth are essentially by definition too poor to afford interplanetary travel. And no, no amount future sci-fi technology can possibly overcome the simple energy costs of this! If someone can afford the hugely energy intensive interplanetary travel, and the up-front investment required to survive incredibly harsh environments, then by definition they could more productively invest that here on Earth! It's the cheaper and better option in every possible way, and always will be. This will remain true even if it's standing room only on the entire planetary surface -- it'll be cheaper to build levels upwards while digging downwards. Maybe our atmosphere will become horrifically polluted? Sure, okay, air filters are faaar cheaper than a full vacuum-capable space suit! Etc, etc, etc... [1] Okay, fine, maybe in a million years. Whatever ends up preferring Mars at that point will no longer be "human" by any sane classification. [2] For some values of nobody. There are morons that buy overpriced branded handbags made of literal trash. I doubt idiots like that will make for a successful, self-sustaining colony.
OisinMoran 6mo ago
You may enjoy this piece, Domes are over-rated: https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2019/11/28/domes-are-very-over-rated/ https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2019/11/28/domes-are-very...
- lukan 6mo ago
  I did enjoy it, but I don't think domes are overrated. They are just way harder to build in reality, than in science fiction ..

by lukan 6mo ago

nradov 6mo ago

Which dome construction material would be transparent to sunlight but block ionizing radiation?

LorenPechtel 6mo ago
1) Why do you need sunlight? 2) If you have a source of hydrogen: water. Bonus as you don't have to make the dome hold pressure. A layer of water of the right depth will generate the force needed, the structure only needs to keep itself level. The only pressure holding is outside that, enough to keep the water from boiling. And, well, it's water--if it's hit by a rock that isn't too big you'll just have hole in the top layer, easily fixed. The same general idea would work on the Moon but the water is far from transparent if you pile up enough of it and you need a lot of hydrogen.
- lukan 6mo ago
  Well, I did wrote "gives sunlight" and that is a valid reply to it. But ... I would need sunlight actually. That seems somewhat possible with light tubes, but the much nicer solution, a transparent dome to still see mars clouds at day and the stars at night, is indeed not possible with current materials.

cosmic_cheese 6mo ago

Gravity kind of cuts both ways. Closer to that of Earth is nearly guaranteed to be better for long term human health, but there's a possibility that martian gravity is "good enough" when supplemented with excercise while also making heavy operations and getting back out of the planet's gravity well easier.

cduzz 6mo ago

Venus seems like a wonderful place to live, relatively speaking. At the right altitude where you can "float" on the ocean, it's a pretty comfortable temperature and there's plenty of solar energy but you're shielded from the solar radiation. So, long term, your body will still work, assuming you can solve "the other problems." Of course, the down-side is that there's nothing to stand on and probably more importantly, there aren't many useful materials to work with besides tons of carbon, oxygen, and nitrogen. Not much hydrogen there, so not much water, which probably is the biggest problem. One of them, anyhow. Also, there's probably not a whole lot to do besides float (zoom, actually) around and slowly go stir crazy in your bubble. But relatively speaking, it's way nicer than living in a hole on mars where you'll slowly die from gravity sickness, or radiation poisoning, or whatever.

jcranmer 6mo ago
> Not much hydrogen there, so not much water, which probably is the biggest problem. Actually, the cloud layer at that level is mostly sulfuric acid, from which you can get your water. It also means you need to be in a hazmat suit when you walk outside, but that's still a step up from everywhere else, where you need a bulky pressure suit instead.

operatingthetan 6mo ago

If we terraform mars, isn't the dirt still toxic?

lukan 6mo ago
No, as terraforming means changing that. Whether it is really possible, is a different question, but after you have an atmosphere, you could have engineered microorganism processing the soil etc.
- operatingthetan 6mo ago
  In that sense then the term "terraforming" is on equal footing with alchemy.
  - fylo 6mo ago
    [flagged]
  - wolvoleo 6mo ago
    Doing something like that at planetary scale is science fiction anyway even if we did have the tech to do it.
    - naravara 6mo ago
      If you can kick off self-sustaining biological processes it’ll happen on its own eventually, but you’d just be looking at generational time scales to do it. Of course you’ll probably have lots of side-effects.
      - jodrellblank 6mo ago
        How do we do that? I imagine dumping Earth life on Mars it will just die. What if we buried a terrarium at the Martian pole with a radio isotope and solar heater and controls so that it could try growing bacteria inside and controlled-leaking some outside into a nearby warm (liquid water) surroundings, and that could get many chances to evolve strains that could survive further away - analogous to ocean life around deep hydrothermal vents. Anyone know of speculative plans of this sort?

tarr11 6mo ago

I wonder if it will turn out to be easier to adapt lifeforms to the planets than to try to adapt the planets to the lifeforms.

lukan 6mo ago
Both probably, but you cannot really adapt life to no water and hard radiation. (at most sustain it in stasis, but not growing)
SoftTalker 6mo ago
Neither is realistic; living on the Moon or Mars or any other planet is a fantasy.
- SecretDreams 6mo ago
  This is the thinking of someone on the timescales of a single life. If humanity persists another 1000 years on our current trajectory (US/world politics not withstanding), I think nothing is really a fantasy. Rather, it's all possible but maybe just not in our own lifetimes. But it is also terribly difficult for us to plan for tomorrow, let alone for a future where our descendants are at the helm.
  - fellowmartian 6mo ago
    I agree, it’s just a failure of imagination. Some folks correctly foresee not being able to continue what we’re doing now in the exact same way in some new context and conclude everything is impossible. Life isn’t this fickle, it’s adapted before and will adapt again. This is why great science fiction is so valuable, as some people are better at imagining new ways of being more than others, and can show the rest of us the possibilities.
    - jiggawatts 6mo ago
      The counterargument is a simple opportunity cost calculation: There will never, ever, ever[1] be a scenario where if you weighed up the options of "expand into some less habitable area of the Earth" versus "expand to Mars", the latter is the better option either 1) financially, or b) quality of life. Nobody[2] ever picks the dramatically more expensive and dramatically worse option! Also, people that are desperate enough to even consider living in the least desirable -- but still just barely habitable -- parts of planet Earth are essentially by definition too poor to afford interplanetary travel. And no, no amount future sci-fi technology can possibly overcome the simple energy costs of this! If someone can afford the hugely energy intensive interplanetary travel, and the up-front investment required to survive incredibly harsh environments, then by definition they could more productively invest that here on Earth! It's the cheaper and better option in every possible way, and always will be. This will remain true even if it's standing room only on the entire planetary surface -- it'll be cheaper to build levels upwards while digging downwards. Maybe our atmosphere will become horrifically polluted? Sure, okay, air filters are faaar cheaper than a full vacuum-capable space suit! Etc, etc, etc... [1] Okay, fine, maybe in a million years. Whatever ends up preferring Mars at that point will no longer be "human" by any sane classification. [2] For some values of nobody. There are morons that buy overpriced branded handbags made of literal trash. I doubt idiots like that will make for a successful, self-sustaining colony.

OisinMoran 6mo ago

You may enjoy this piece, Domes are over-rated: https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2019/11/28/domes-are-very-over-rated/ https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2019/11/28/domes-are-very...

lukan 6mo ago
I did enjoy it, but I don't think domes are overrated. They are just way harder to build in reality, than in science fiction ..