i appreciate any billionaire addition to the human potential club but this is extremely not true. there’s almost nothing of value on the moon and it can’t (practically speaking) be terraformed. given current technology, mars is the only way forward.https://twitter.com/trengriffin/status/1086740028951162881 …
-
much much much harder. in terraforming, mars does most of the work itself. mainly what we need to do is warm the southern polar ice cap (frozen CO2).
from there, a runaway greenhouse effect builds an atmosphere and oceans. we start washing out perchlorate, seed the biome with plant life, and start building colonies.
-
-
I think the thing that makes the most sense w/Mars is that iron, etc for construction is already there. If low gravity really messes w/people's health, tho, there's no fixing that w/out making underground centrifugal systems like planet-based O'Neill cylinder.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
Terraforming mars won't be easy, the atmosphere might not be able to retain air in high enough density. maybe even impossible, but i will take mars over the moon. Venus is underrated; it can sustain floating cities high up in its atmosphere, plus no concern for health like Mars.
-
And it's a readily available source for the gases we'd need for mars. We could basically create frozen missiles and launch them at Mars fm Venus. And gravity would be closer to Earth's.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
This is a way more optimistic assessment of the ease of terraforming Mars than any of the literature I've read suggests. Curious to see your sources on this.
-
case for mars by
@robert_zubrin — the authority on this subject imo
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.