NationStates

The Hindustani State wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:Venus? The surface temperature of Venus is 864F (462C) and the atmospheric pressure is 91 atmospheres. Lead melts at 621F (327C).

Did you read the entire post?

I did. We don't have anything near the technology to terraform Venus. Once you remove the sulfuric acid clouds, you'd have to deal with radically increased solar radiation.

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:

USS Monitor wrote:
If we build colonies, more people will be able to enjoy the natural beauty.

If I recall correctly, they also thought the planet will just be a play thing for the rich. I unfortunately cannot find the article to confirm or link here, as my search engine keywords are not bringing it up. It's been months since I've read it.

If so, then we don't have to waste as much space for gated communities and golf courses here on Earth.

I'm not so convinced, though. Being one of the first colonists would not be an easy comfortable life. When Europeans were building colonies elsewhere on Earth, it wasn't all the rich going to play God. There were also a lot of poorer people that were willing to put up with the hardships of moving somewhere new for a chance at getting out of poverty, and I think some of that dynamic would still exist.

In a hurry? No. Just keep it as consideration. Keep researching and developing the tech.

We probably should invest more time in trying to change our way of behaving and how we treat resources down here on Earth before we go on trying to colonize other planets. If we don’t correct our behavior, we’ll just export it to other colonies and then we would just be back to square one.

Farnhamia wrote:

Valrifell wrote:
There are parts of the Venusian atmosphere with a pressure comparable to one atm, meaning the only thing we have to worry about is the hot and the lack of air.

I never heard that, source, please?

And anyway, the famous clouds are made of sulfuric acid. Prime development space!

A structure as tall as the Empire State Building will penetrate the cloud layer and at that height, you could theoretically walk out with nothing but an oxygen mask and maybe a cooling device depending on the weather, air pressure and all are good

https://terraforming.fandom.com/wiki/Ve ... ing_Cities

The Hindustani State wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:I never heard that, source, please?

And anyway, the famous clouds are made of sulfuric acid. Prime development space!

A structure as tall as the Empire State Building will penetrate the cloud layer and at that height, you could theoretically walk out with nothing but an oxygen mask and maybe a cooling device depending on the weather, air pressure and all are good

https://terraforming.fandom.com/wiki/Ve ... ing_Cities

You forgot about sulfuric acid

Farnhamia wrote:

The Hindustani State wrote:Did you read the entire post?

I did. We don't have anything near the technology to terraform Venus. Once you remove the sulfuric acid clouds, you'd have to deal with radically increased solar radiation.

Replace sulfuric acid clouds with LSD clouds.

USS Monitor wrote:

LiberNovusAmericae wrote:If I recall correctly, they also thought the planet will just be a play thing for the rich. I unfortunately cannot find the article to confirm or link here, as my search engine keywords are not bringing it up. It's been months since I've read it.

If so, then we don't have to waste as much space for gated communities and golf courses here on Earth.

I'm not so convinced, though. Being one of the first colonists would not be an easy comfortable life. When Europeans were building colonies elsewhere on Earth, it wasn't all the rich going to play God. There were also a lot of poorer people that were willing to put up with the hardships of moving somewhere new for a chance at getting out of poverty, and I think some of that dynamic would still exist.

People who hated their life in Europe formed joint-stock companies and went to colonize the New World, of course comparing building a ship and sailing the Atlantic to building a rocket and leaving Earth is off, but it could be possible if cheaper tech is discovered

Farnhamia wrote:

Valrifell wrote:
There are parts of the Venusian atmosphere with a pressure comparable to one atm, meaning the only thing we have to worry about is the hot and the lack of air.

I never heard that, source, please?

And anyway, the famous clouds are made of sulfuric acid. Prime development space!

If the surface pressure is higher than 1 atm, then there will be some altitude where the pressure is 1 atm. It may be too high above the surface for it to be any use, but as you go from 91 atm at the surface to 0 in space, at some point you have to pass 1.

Same principle as going up in the highest mountains on Earth, and the air pressure is less than at sea level.

USS Monitor wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:I never heard that, source, please?

And anyway, the famous clouds are made of sulfuric acid. Prime development space!

If the surface pressure is higher than 1 atm, then there will be some altitude where the pressure is 1 atm. It may be too high above the surface for it to be any use, but as you go from 91 atm at the surface to 0 in space, at some point you have to pass 1.

Same principle as going up in the highest mountains on Earth, and the air pressure is less than at sea level.

Right, so up high, in the clouds. Remember the Dissolving Nazi in Raiders of the Lost Ark?

Anyway, my point was, Venus is not a better bet for colonization than Mars. So there.

Farnhamia wrote:

USS Monitor wrote:
If the surface pressure is higher than 1 atm, then there will be some altitude where the pressure is 1 atm. It may be too high above the surface for it to be any use, but as you go from 91 atm at the surface to 0 in space, at some point you have to pass 1.

Same principle as going up in the highest mountains on Earth, and the air pressure is less than at sea level.

Right, so up high, in the clouds. Remember the Dissolving Nazi in Raiders of the Lost Ark?

Anyway, my point was, Venus is not a better bet for colonization than Mars. So there.

I think Jupiter is a better bet, since I think you can build space stations at a an orbit that will get earth level gravity while allowing easyish access to all the metallic hydrogen.

And Mercury is a good planet to break apart for a grid of solar panels orbiting the sun, supplying us with lots of power.

Of course, this is all long term investments, things humanity haven’t proven very adept at.

Dooom35796821595 wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:Right, so up high, in the clouds. Remember the Dissolving Nazi in Raiders of the Lost Ark?

Anyway, my point was, Venus is not a better bet for colonization than Mars. So there.

I think Jupiter is a better bet, since I think you can build space stations at a an orbit that will get earth level gravity while allowing easyish access to all the metallic hydrogen.

And Mercury is a good planet to break apart for a grid of solar panels orbiting the sun, supplying us with lots of power.

Of course, this is all long term investments, things humanity haven’t proven very adept at.

Oh, I don't know, we managed to advance from being plains apes in East Africa to the glorious heights ... anyway, we've done okay. I think we could do it, maybe, given enough profit incentive.

Dooom35796821595 wrote:

The Emerald Legion wrote:
Pff. No. We just kill their invasion force into sovereign American territory.

But it’s not American territory just because America says it is. And killing another country’s astronauts would be an act of war.

It is if we shoot people who try to stop us claiming it. And doubtful.

The Emerald Legion wrote:

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
But it’s not American territory just because America says it is. And killing another country’s astronauts would be an act of war.

It is if we shoot people who try to stop us claiming it. And doubtful.

And knock off the "we'll shoot everybody" daydreams.

Dooom35796821595 wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:Right, so up high, in the clouds. Remember the Dissolving Nazi in Raiders of the Lost Ark?

Anyway, my point was, Venus is not a better bet for colonization than Mars. So there.

I think Jupiter is a better bet, since I think you can build space stations at a an orbit that will get earth level gravity while allowing easyish access to all the metallic hydrogen.

And Mercury is a good planet to break apart for a grid of solar panels orbiting the sun, supplying us with lots of power.

Of course, this is all long term investments, things humanity haven’t proven very adept at.

Which is why we need to be open mindset and pragmatic. And look long term.
We need to establish space station colonies for the Terran Moon, Mars, Venus and Jupiter, which we can do.

Then from there go to ground, and sky (floating atmospheric) colonies, obviously initially protected and enclosed, then look at terraforming.

And slowly begin it (it could take thousands of years but got to start somewhere).

Farnhamia wrote:

The Emerald Legion wrote:
It is if we shoot people who try to stop us claiming it. And doubtful.

And knock off the "we'll shoot everybody" daydreams.

Chances of total territorial claim is unlikely. But there were wars over territory in the new world. It's kind of ridiculous to assume that there won't be frontier wars between colonial expeditions in space. Chances are, these will not escalate into full blown terrestrial wars.

Rather than dumping trillions into a Moon or Mars base that will become obsolete by the time we figure out how to disassemble planets for raw materials to build a swarm of orbital habitats (far more efficient per unit mass!), I'd like to see us use space to solve engineering problems; starshades around the planet to generate power and combat global warming, say, or some way to supercharge the Earth's magnetic field to protect against solar flares, or any number of crazier or less-crazy ideas. Infrastructure will be essential first and foremost; we can't reasonably put a million people in space without setting up rotovators or space elevators and cleaning up Kessler syndrome and such.

The problem is that when people say "we need to fix stuff on Earth first", they're referring either to things that are already major and non-neglected cause areas (world poverty and hunger, neglected diseases, climate change, etc.) or to things that are not causing financial pressure against going to space (political corruption, mass surveillance, etc.). My own cause area prioritization would say that we should be thinking about AGI safety before space, since AGI is likely to screw everything up bigtime relatively soon and lack of space exploration probably isn't, but in any case there is room in humanity's numerous conflicting budgets and paradigms to understand our universe a little better and use space to advance our own goals.

We have no idea how long Earth will last. All we know is it won't last forever.

The sooner we can get into space, the better. And for all we know, just the innovations that tend to come with space exploration might pay for itself.

Yes. Space based resource extraction will fundamentally alter our concept of resource scarcity.

Well the stars aren't getting any closer, just the opposite in fact.

There is also a finite amount of non-renewable energy sources for us to use to put payloads into space.

Maybe the more we put into space technology now, the better.

Farnhamia wrote:

The Hindustani State wrote:Did you read the entire post?

I did. We don't have anything near the technology to terraform Venus. Once you remove the sulfuric acid clouds, you'd have to deal with radically increased solar radiation.

Our best bet with colonizing Venus would be to have giant floating cities high enough that the atmospheric pressure is under 2 bar, preferably around 0.8 bar (better temperatures). In the carbon dioxide atmosphere we would not need hydrogen/helium lifting gases; nitrogen and oxygen work good.

Advancement is good in general, with a few exceptions (this not being one of them), so we should try to advance more.

I want to colonize Space, just so that nations on other planets can leave the UN. Besides, space colonies can give us enough oil to last for a VERY long time.

Dooom35796821595 wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:Right, so up high, in the clouds. Remember the Dissolving Nazi in Raiders of the Lost Ark?

Anyway, my point was, Venus is not a better bet for colonization than Mars. So there.

I think Jupiter is a better bet, since I think you can build space stations at a an orbit that will get earth level gravity while allowing easyish access to all the metallic hydrogen.

And Mercury is a good planet to break apart for a grid of solar panels orbiting the sun, supplying us with lots of power.

Of course, this is all long term investments, things humanity haven’t proven very adept at.

Any orbital craft can simulate earth level gravity by acceleration (centrifuges). To get it without that around Jupiter would require an orbital velocity not great enough to avoid going into Jupiter, so you would need another way of staying up.

I'd suppose so.
Can't quite join in space tourism unless they fixed the g problem.
Heart defects make that a no go.

Kombinita Socialisma Demokratio wrote:

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
I think Jupiter is a better bet, since I think you can build space stations at a an orbit that will get earth level gravity while allowing easyish access to all the metallic hydrogen.

And Mercury is a good planet to break apart for a grid of solar panels orbiting the sun, supplying us with lots of power.

Of course, this is all long term investments, things humanity haven’t proven very adept at.

Any orbital craft can simulate earth level gravity by acceleration (centrifuges). To get it without that around Jupiter would require an orbital velocity not great enough to avoid going into Jupiter, so you would need another way of staying up.

Right, forgot about that.

Well, I guess centrifugal gravity will have to suffice until/unless we create gravity plating. Maybe a design like the O’Neil Cylinder, but an orbital station instead of a star ship.

Novus America wrote:

Dooom35796821595 wrote:
I think Jupiter is a better bet, since I think you can build space stations at a an orbit that will get earth level gravity while allowing easyish access to all the metallic hydrogen.

And Mercury is a good planet to break apart for a grid of solar panels orbiting the sun, supplying us with lots of power.

Of course, this is all long term investments, things humanity haven’t proven very adept at.

Which is why we need to be open mindset and pragmatic. And look long term.
We need to establish space station colonies for the Terran Moon, Mars, Venus and Jupiter, which we can do.

Then from there go to ground, and sky (floating atmospheric) colonies, obviously initially protected and enclosed, then look at terraforming.

And slowly begin it (it could take thousands of years but got to start somewhere).

I doesn’t have to take thousands of years, Humans are terraforming Earth and have changed it largely in half a century, since there are efforts to stop it, it’s going at its current pace, but if we are engineering climate change on different planets intentionally, Humans can do it quite fast