People will never be able to live at another planet....
- Thread starter SoulKiller
- Start date
SoulKiller
Active member
Awards
You should realize already that spaceship that they send is small and used for robots it's not that easy to make a spaceship for a bunch of humans as people think and for your information the space have no atmosphere and when the spaceship land on a planet it won't have the power the force to go thought the mars atmosphere and return back to earth spaceship require loads of energy to even travel from earth to mars and if the spaceship landed in mars people will probably live for few weeks maybe month then die.
Jellal Fernandes
Active member
SoulKiller
Active member
Awards
You watch a lot of movies it seems this is real life not movie living in a planet isn't possible and even traveling from planet to planet with a large spaceship for humans isn't that easy its possible but will take a lot of time to reach from planet to planet and were talking about mars here the closest planet we can reach let alone other planets.
SoulKiller
Active member
Awards
Why would I lol because you can't accept the fact that humans will never e able to live in another planet specaily mars atleast I have evidence up there while you have nothing I'm pretty sure your the embaressed one with that post lol goo read some science plz
It's not completely out of the realm of possibility. However, there are things that could prove much more fruitful for our technological and industrial capabilities.
Call me crazy, but I honestly think Venus is a much more plausible candidate for extended terraforming projects.
Let's not. Remember, plants use sunlight to produce and store energy in the form of oxygen gas and various sugars - the oxygen gas is vented into the atmosphere for later recovery and use during low-light conditions.
No one expects humans to simply step out and breathe on another planet. Bacteria and other life forms suited to extreme environments would, first, be deployed in order to convert the atmosphere and build up organic residues in the soils.
The main problems with mars are the following: a thin atmosphere and low temperatures. Atmospheric pressure will be a constant issue (as oxygen would need to be excessively common in the atmosphere for our lungs to be able to use it), and it's actually unlikely that the planet would ever be suitable to humans living outside of a pressurized and shielded environment. Though the raw terrain could likely be used for agricultural and other purposes - much of it would have to be carried out by automated systems.
I suspect it would make for some awesome tea production. The best teas are grown at very high altitudes (low atmospheric pressure) - where the tea grows more slowly.
You do bring up a couple important points. One of the big reasons we never went to mars 20 years ago is because the rate of technological and industrial development meant that we would be able to beat ourselves there. A ship launched 20 years ago would have taken several years to reach mars - and by the time that project was completed and the ship launched, we could have built and launched a ship that would take merely a couple years to reach Mars.
The other issue with going to mars is the lack of practical mission. A return trip would be excessively difficult to plan - as you would have to take a substantial amount of rocket fuel (and oxidizer) all the way to Mars (in other words - you would increase the amount of mass you need to launch from the Earth's surface exponentially).
Crunching a few of the numbers, I calculated that it would take roughly 10 Saturn V rocket launches into Low-Earth-Orbit to provide the raw material necessary for a space craft capable of sustaining a crew on a two-way trip to visit Mars's surface. That does not even begin to take into account the launches necessary to support the orbital assembly effort and continued manned operations necessary.
That dwarfs the ISS project.
It would be much easier to take you seriously if you knew what the hell punctuation was.
That said:
A proper approach for developing the space program would be to focus on Luna. We can, currently, develop and launch solar powered automated excavation devices to the moon. These will be used for a two-pronged goal. First is to mine raw materials and stockpile it for automated refining systems that will be developed and launched in the interim. Second is to clear out sections of crust that can be later sealed off and turned into habitable pressurized areas in the fourth and fifth stages of the program.
The second stage will be to develop and launch self-contained solar-powered refining systems to the moon. These will then begin to process and refine the raw ores and silica into purified stocks.
The third stage is to launch integrated manufacturing systems to the moon (again, developed in the interim using the latest in technology available). This would include "3d printing" systems. These would begin to use the stocks of processed materials to produce a number of common structural components that would be, again, stockpiled.
Stage four launches automated assembly systems (such as 'android or android-like automatons). These then begin to enter the vacant mined structures to reinforce walls and develop the framework for habitats (as well as some other facilities).
Stage five is the first time man takes a direct role in projects on the lunar surface. Compressed atmosphere and biological supplies are launched en masse to the lunar surface where manned engineering teams finalize the construction of the habitats.
Stage seven is more or less the "mature" stage where the habitats begin working for their true purpose of low-gravity R&D as well as overseeing manufacturing of structural components for orbital habitats planned for both Earth and Solar orbits.
You then use a similar process of using automation to assemble as much of a structure as possible in the inhospitable environment of the void and then send manned teams that finalize the project and become its first full-time inhabitants. This begins to form self-contained biospheres in various orbits about the solar system (far more within our technological capability than terraforming of an entire planet).
The same approach should be used for any attempt to colonize (or even just explore) another planet. Send in the machines to pave the way and establish structures. Finalize it with manned explorations that will have many essential industrial tools already on-hand by virtue of the automated machinery sent before-hand.
Why bother sending many thousands of kilotons worth of material to a planet where it is entirely plausible to make it all on the planet, itself?
The space programs, thus far, have had far too great of a focus on manned exploration. While manned exploration is important - the advances being made in automated machinery completely change what is sensible and what is not sensible. It is not sensible to merely 'soup up' the Apollo program and set the target as mars.
But as far as your conclusion that we will always remain bound to this planet...
That, my friend, is an incorrect conclusion. I think many under-estimate the challenge of space. But, that is why you have people like myself born into your population. We are the ones that make the impossible such an every-day thing that people envisioned such outlandish things as Star Trek.
Jellal Fernandes
Active member
Excuse me.. As i didn't specify why i said what i said..You must feel embarrassed that the thread got taken down...Whined like a girl and here it is. Congratulations.
SoulKiller
Active member
Awards
First of all thanks for this reply.
Second of all Living in one of the hottest planet in the solar system xd how that possible second of all as it seems your clearly have more knowledge than me in the exploration in outer our solar system but as you see it's very very very very hard near impossible to live in a planet specially outside of our solar system imagin how much power we need it will take thousand of years if not million to reach a planet out of our solar system which make it kinda impossible for humans to actually reach planets outside and live. Anyway about living in the planet itself there is no planet in our solar system that allow us humans to live no planet have the condition mars we will die there and I think it's even worse to live in Venus no let me correct that's it's impossible to even make a human land there lol but clearly it seems you have more info than me but still with the amount of oil we have right now and after hundreds of years and lets not remember it take LOADS of energy I don't think it's possible to live in another planet it's possible theoritaclly but when it comes to do it it's another thing and no my freind something's are ment to stay impossible and even you bringed the smartest person on earth it still would be impossible.
SoulKiller
Active member
Awards
And are you mad my freind what's your point from this post lol keep that wastfull post to yourself the next time lol.Excuse me.. As i didn't specify why i said what i said..You must feel embarrassed that the thread got taken down...Whined like a girl and here it is. Congratulations.
Well, in real life we can't travel to planets outside of our solar system. So, assuming space travel technology was developed to reach inhabitable planets, which is the hard part, I'd have to believe we could develop atmosphere changing technology, or at the very least we could just live in the parked spacecraft. But tbh, I don't feel like arguing with you...you win
SoulKiller
Active member
Awards
I really don't care if I argue with you or not I'm not here to start a war infact I like discussing the outer space etc Anyway ty for a legit reply atleast.
Yeah it is pretty much impossible.
Every physicist and astrologist deep inside know that but they won't tell you that since they don't want to sound close minded the also sell books and science fiction etc. But there are laws of the universe and physical constants that prevent interstellar travel(the speed of light and Heisenberg uncertainty principle) and being able to manipulate the weather or the atmosphere. You can always say yeah but 1 million years down the road technology will be so great we will become unstoppable but unfortunately its not about us being smart or about us having the technology, the physical constants of the universe and they way it was designed or created prevent these two things from happening....
No matter how hard you hear on the discovery channel or you buy books from Michio Kaku or Brian Greene etc or even hear articles online...those methods do not violate the physical laws...but they require things that are near as impossible (most of them infinite source of energy) as to obtain the speed of light and even if you managed to do them they also have short comings but dont worry youll never get there to face those shortcomings.
You can't manipulate matter to the obtain of obtaining whatever you want such as nice clean atmosphere, deep inside matter is unpredictable or impossible to manipulate and it doesn't have anything to do with our technology, it's another law of the universe which einstein himself tried to break it in his last days.
Sure you can write your own theory on paper and say this do that and it fits in your equation such miguel gutierrez method but in real life that's impossible as well no matter what technology you have
We are stuck here forever maybe a few people in Mars and that's about it. Maybe in a different universe where the laws are different , it could be possible but in this universe, forget about interstellar travel or even inhabit another planet xD. I am a physicist btw.
Every physicist and astrologist deep inside know that but they won't tell you that since they don't want to sound close minded the also sell books and science fiction etc. But there are laws of the universe and physical constants that prevent interstellar travel(the speed of light and Heisenberg uncertainty principle) and being able to manipulate the weather or the atmosphere. You can always say yeah but 1 million years down the road technology will be so great we will become unstoppable but unfortunately its not about us being smart or about us having the technology, the physical constants of the universe and they way it was designed or created prevent these two things from happening....
No matter how hard you hear on the discovery channel or you buy books from Michio Kaku or Brian Greene etc or even hear articles online...those methods do not violate the physical laws...but they require things that are near as impossible (most of them infinite source of energy) as to obtain the speed of light and even if you managed to do them they also have short comings but dont worry youll never get there to face those shortcomings.
You can't manipulate matter to the obtain of obtaining whatever you want such as nice clean atmosphere, deep inside matter is unpredictable or impossible to manipulate and it doesn't have anything to do with our technology, it's another law of the universe which einstein himself tried to break it in his last days.
Sure you can write your own theory on paper and say this do that and it fits in your equation such miguel gutierrez method but in real life that's impossible as well no matter what technology you have
We are stuck here forever maybe a few people in Mars and that's about it. Maybe in a different universe where the laws are different , it could be possible but in this universe, forget about interstellar travel or even inhabit another planet xD. I am a physicist btw.
Last edited:
ThomasJeffersonwasasadist
Active member
futuretechnology.com your thread is fallacy. we wont always be in these bodies. its possible now but not practical in the slightest.
I mentioned the idea with plants before. It's actually pretty clever. We would also need 6 fundamental elements that are required for living (both plants and people) since they build up organism in 99%: oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, sulfur, phosphorus, and hydrogen.
Last edited:
Venus is made exceptionally hot because of the dense atmosphere and cloud layers.
Re-introducing hydrogen to the surface of Venus (tugging several large comets into a collision course with Venus) would be a primary way to start terraforming the planet (there is plenty of oxygen - but most of it is tied up in corrosive acid compounds that react readily with hydrogen to from water and other more stable compounds that are more in line with Earth's geology).
In many ways - Venus is Earth's twin. They are almost identical in terms of surface gravity and the potential to retain an atmosphere.
There is only one major 'flaw' in Venus - Venus lacks a strong magnetic field, which means much of its upper atmosphere is subjected to direct blasts from solar wind and flares. This is likely the cause of Venus's missing hydrogen (much of it got stripped away by radiation and solar wind).
It is currently theorized, however, that forms of bacteria or other extreme life could be supported in the cloud layers of venus - where constant lightning strikes create a weak electromagnetic field capable of shielding life from radiation.
More research would need to be done on Venus's geology (which, apparently, does not involve plate tectonics as we are familiar with on our planet) and on the ability to, if necessary, develop an artificial shielding for the planet.
Again - this isn't intended to be a 'simple' or short-term project. Hundreds - even thousands of years would go into terraforming a planet.
The main reason I support Venus is because of its proximity and similarity to Earth. It also receives a similar amount of solar radiation - making it very plausible that we could develop the planet to be very suitable for ourselves and other organisms we are familiar with without encountering complications of atmospheric pressures and gravitational concerns.
Since a few thousand years is a more practical time-line for extra-solar exploration; a terraforming project of any available planet in our solar system would be a worthwhile endeavor. The likelihood we would be able to develop Venus into a second planetary home is roughly equal to the likelihood we will find habitable planets in other star systems while having a practical means to communicate and travel between those systems.
Living on another planet isn't an issue so long as you can properly set up structures that can maintain proper atmospheric pressures and oxygen levels. Atmospheric pressure is something that, even if one has an earth-like atmosphere, can cause a lot of problems. Let's say you were to simply double Earth's atmospheric pressure and leave the oxygen content the same. All kinds of issues with hyper-ventilation would become common in regular breathing as our uptake of oxygen climbs quite high. At certain pressures - oxygen becomes toxic to us.
At lower pressures, we have to have a substantially higher concentration of oxygen in the atmosphere to be able to breathe.
The other issue involves the processes of our bodies - a considerable amount of research has shown that many wounds heal faster and more complete under slightly higher and more humid atmospheric conditions than are common on our planet in this day and age (though it is suspected that these existed around the end of the last ice-age). So there are other physiological problems we could run into when exposed to routinely higher or routinely lower atmospheric pressures.
It's all, mostly, water under the bridge. We've already got the technology and the industry to solve the problems. The main issue is getting those things to another location.
I, personally, believe we will discover a means of faster than light propulsion. I'm a proponent of the "jump drive" concept (where you shift you location, instantly, to another location - you don't actually move in classical terms) - but I am open to other interpretations (it's also possible that there could be a 'skipping-tunnel' system where you approach the speed of light and reach the limits of Planck energy, send a burst of energy into the system, and you then tunnel ahead of the energy that is limited to propagating at the speed of light - then you do it all over again after dropping 'out' of the tunnel phenomena).
On the other hand - the concept of generational ships exists. You would launch with a self-sustaining biosphere and a reactor system designed to last many hundreds of years. The crew reproduces naturally in the simulated environment and trains their descendants to operate the ship (and the history of humans). That generation then grows up and has children... rinse-lather-repeat until you reach your destination and the serving crew carries out the mission.
I'm not a huge proponent of the idea... because it injects many possible points of human failure (as well as introduces moral dilemmas; you literally have people born as slaves to a will decided long in advance of them - to a degree unlike any culture on our planet to date.... there's no opportunity to become anything else... no opportunity to choose your own 'fate').
But people will do many things for the sake of exploration.
Well, for starters, you would send a person there in a suit. They would not simply step outside the ship and start trying to suck down carbon dioxide.
You could also build colonies on the planet - large structures that would maintain an atmosphere that we can breathe. They would process the outside atmosphere to degrees that are possible and we would likely have large repositories of bacteria/algae and plants that process the atmosphere (and waste water) into a breathable atmosphere.
Going further (and into very large, time-consuming processes), we would eventually begin terraforming projects that would use plants, bacteria, and resources brought from asteroids and comets to convert the entire composition of the planet's atmosphere and outer layers of crust into things that more closely resemble Earth. These would be highly ambitious projects - take hundreds (even thousands) of years, but eventually convert the very planet into a earth-like place to live.
I think Terraforming has a place in the future of human colonization - but I am, honestly, a proponent of orbital structures built to emulate the conditions of Earth. These are within the known realms of engineering and can be deployed virtually anywhere (as well as moved around). Since they can be placed in orbit - the physics and energy requirements of traveling in space become much more simple. You could, quite literally, "let go" of a package of processed materials on one station with a spinning structure to simulate gravity, and it would drift to another structure for pickup. You don't have to launch from within a gravity well.
I think the "true" future of humanity is to completely bypass the mass colonization of other planets and to merely go about building artificial structures in orbit near sources of materials or where research can be conducted. Planets will be colonized where convenient or absolutely essential - but the time and specialization involved in colonizing a planet leaves it to be mostly a sentimental novelty as opposed to a practical and advantageous endeavor.
Nuclear fission can easily power us for another 1,000 years with proven resources.
Nuclear fusion is on the horizon - and that will power us through to the entropic death of the universe. Though I suspect there will be even more interesting sources of power that can be developed (things that break currently known laws).
If you gave me command of the resources at NASA - you would see the commissioning of the first orbital colony within your lifetime. I would be scrounging every penny I could for about the first ten to fifteen years of the project... but companies and individuals would be lining up for the opportunity to utilize the habitable spaces developed on the moon... and I'd be raking in the revenue that would be necessary to start the next phase of engineering.
It wouldn't be a large colony - and its only purpose would be to manufacture even larger parts in a zero-G environment (for even larger colonies meant to build ships) - but it would be a colony with the goal of being able to support roughly 1,000 people routinely and be able to handle surges that temporarily double the manning (may end up having to adjust those plans as time goes on).
The main limiting factor in even larger colony constructions is the need to bring asteroids into precise orbits for mining and refining operations. Certain asteroids have been shown to have very dense supplies of organic compounds that would be very useful in constructing larger colonies (otherwise - the biomass has to be brought from the Earth - which is a very costly proposition, even with magnetically assisted launches to orbit). Those would take time to put into position and would be reliant upon construction of automated VASIMR based 'tugs.' I also suspect some legal hurdles when I mention that I'm going to be tugging asteroids -toward- the Earth.
People tend to get a bit antsy with that idea - so I may just plan on putting the mining and refining operations in orbit around Jupiter (where people won't care if an asteroid gets loose and decides to slam into the planet or one of its moons) - which may be just as well... would take longer to set up the installation and to deliver refined materials to more earth-local construction systems... but less time to drag asteroids into position and far less concern with governments getting pissy).
Really? I'm delighted to have your acquaintance.
I'm an engineer (as well as a student of other disciplines). Do you know how many times I've heard the "It's impossible" line?
Not too often, anymore. People have learned that it's a dangerous charge to make when in my presence. They always end up gagging on their foot.
Glad to make an acquaintance too. No need to sound rude.
I also ended up getting a degree in electrical engineering, a master degree and I may understand your point of view.
I say it's impossible because it is simply laws of the universe preventing us from happening. I dont think it has to do with technology or knowledge. These laws which are proven gazillion times everyday and if these laws were wrong, the universe would not exist. If these laws were wrong, none of the devices we have today would work.
It's a matter of the structure. The universe somehow ended up with a design preventing us from interstellar travel. Michio Kaku and Stephen Hawkings(smartest guy on the planet) they both know this but they sell and become famous telling stories and possible loopholes to get out of these laws but at the end they all require infinite energy xD. However the constants of the universe may not have been this way throughout its history. Maybe in the next universe these laws can be overridden but would that universe be stable.
I know how bad it sounds but this is pretty much what you learn when you study physics. I was also hopeful for interstellar travel, it was one of the reason why I went to study physics.
If these laws were not to exist, then it will be something to look forward in the future. But we can't change the universe, it's the way it is. We are living in the no interstellar travel universe.
Edit: Hit me up with a PM if you have any idea how to manage interstellar travel which we can discuss. I'd love to hear new ideas but let's say I'm not very hopeful
Last edited:
SoulKiller
Active member
Awards
Damn you people really are into it well I am still 17 years old and I love all of outer space reading what both of you aim and itachi said make me wanna know more but There is one thing for sure that it is impossible i dont care how much technology or science developed even after hundreds of years we may land yes but live I really don't think soo somethings are just ment to stay as it is.
