DisillusionedBook
DisillusionedBook t1_j8spmei wrote
Also look into low gravity making building a thick atmosphere unsustainable too.
There are potential (astronomically expensive and currently technically very improbable) and probably only partial solutions to the lack of magnetosphere, but the gravity problem has no solution that I'm aware of. This is assuming you want an atmosphere as well as radiation shielding.
DisillusionedBook t1_j79ango wrote
Still such a tragic loss. I wish she had been surrounded by better humans.
DisillusionedBook t1_j77nz29 wrote
Reply to comment by dinoroo in Terraforming Mars by c0ntr0ll3dsubstance
I don't think all the required rocket launches and resources from earth would relieve any stress on Earth. Lol.
Look, I get how cool it would be. But the laws of physics and the reality of our still primitive technology are against it.
DisillusionedBook t1_j77lmj3 wrote
Reply to comment by dinoroo in Terraforming Mars by c0ntr0ll3dsubstance
No. Hard disagree. They could theoretically briefly make Mars more habitable with a ridiculous amount of effort over a ridiculous amount of time, effort that could instead fix our own planet, but what would be the point? Mars due to its low gravity (something that cannot be changed, and other factors) would immediately start turning back to what it currently is.
Colonise it in small habs for science sure. Like Antarctica.
DisillusionedBook t1_j75cllm wrote
Reply to comment by evewight in Terraforming Mars by c0ntr0ll3dsubstance
Yep. I'd totally be behind the challenge of going there, exploring, sciencing the shit out of it, maybe even small colony etc... a lot of the lessons learned and tech needed would be useful on Earth. But trying to make it earthlike is a waste of time, resources and money. 0.1% of the effort would probably get rid of all the excess CO2 out of our own atmosphere.
DisillusionedBook t1_j755aw5 wrote
Reply to Terraforming Mars by c0ntr0ll3dsubstance
There's a reason why Mars has no atmosphere. Dreams of terraforming it are dumb. It would need constant replenishment
DisillusionedBook t1_j5dmirp wrote
Well, I suppose that's not something Isaak Asimov or Ray Kurzweil could ever have imagined.
DisillusionedBook t1_j5djpgz wrote
Reply to Sail Sunset by The_Tree_Beard
You can do it Truman!
DisillusionedBook t1_j22o1h3 wrote
Reply to comment by OnVita in What do you imagine the world will look like in 2050? by psychosil444
Not that much. I was an adult in 95. What do you consider night and day? We had early versions of everything we have now pretty much.
DisillusionedBook t1_j22gtvn wrote
Imagine 1995. Same distance back as 2050 is forward. Not much different really apart from the power and quantity of cellphones and computers. In another 27 years similar just different shit and bigger looming environmental collapse
DisillusionedBook t1_j0nyuwa wrote
Reply to Is the expansion of the universe significant enough to be included when calculating the trajectory of spacecrafts? by andreasdagen
Definitely not. The local gravitational area of our galaxy is not under the influence of universe expansion at all. There's nothing to measure locally
DisillusionedBook t1_ja267yf wrote
Reply to TIL there's a rock formation in Saudi Arabia about 6 meters high and 9 meters wide, split curiously in half and balanced on two small, natural pedestals. The origin of the Al Naslaa rock formation is unknown. by OccludedFug
Natural formation, rock probably had a seam or crack that split due to temperature variations and subsequent weathering. It's cool but nothing to suspect anything other than natural.