>Phobos is an extremely, almost impossibly porous and light

Yeah all you gotta do is wait 2 million years for the dust to settle

>>8045854

Woah woah woah now let's HOLD ON, here. This is an emotional moment for all of us, but this MOON has a substantial DOLLAR VALUE attached to it, okay? And if in fact any alien life forms do exist on Mars, there might be an important species we're dealing with, and I don't think you or I can make the decision to do something rash, that might arbitrarily exterminate them!

I will only pay for it if we actually get good video of this shit exploding.
I refuse to otherwise.

>>8045854
>The amount of dust and debris a collision like that could kick up would be more than enough to start the terraforming process and we have the technology to do this today.
it would settle down pretty quick and nothing would happen.

>>8045854
Forgive me as I am a little rusty on the science of terraforming planets.

Would there not be a significant increase in radiation when nuking ice caps / giant floating ice balls on another planet?

I suspect the amount of energy required to push Phobos out of orbit is more than enough to significantly change the Martian environment ourselves in a far more controlled manner.

>>8045854
Well it's either that or nuking it back into orbit so it's collision doesn't fuck with our newly terraformed Mars.

Either way Phobos is gettin nuked.

>>8045883
>Would there not be a significant increase in radiation when nuking ice caps / giant floating ice balls on another planet?
nukes are relatively clean.

>>8045893
this

As far as I can tell, Phobos is fucked.

>>8045854
>Give me one good reason we shouldn't nuke Phobos out of orbit, /sci/.

We don't have enough other material to take advantage of the collision. you'd need to be bombarding it a few times a year with some pretty big and fast moving asteroids/comets in order to start terraforming. If we can get that sort of thing line up and do it all at once then go for it. Otherwise, it is like pissing in the wind.

You can't just move a moon. Nuclear weapons aren't magic you know. Anyway even if we could I don't agree with destroying nature.

File: 1438671153282.png (26KB, 800x721px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 800x721px

>>8045945
>muh destroying nature
>muh ethics
>muh morals

>>8045945
>>8045910

It'd be better to use a mass driver to bombard the moon with asteroids and comets until it smashed into Mars.

Then use lasers to clear all the debris now surrounding the planet to you can land something on it within the next 2000 years.

File: fucking mars.jpg (3MB, 8703x2000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 8703x2000px

>>8045945

Look at this shit. Tell me there's a species that lives here.

#NukeMars2k16

>>8045959
Nature exists for a reason, destroying it usually has unforseen consequences.

>>8045965
>implying that's mars and not just some place out in california/nevada

File: 555 come on now.jpg (26KB, 600x375px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 600x375px

>>8045876
>And if in fact any alien life forms do exist on Mars
There isn't. And there probably never has been. Can we give up on this stupid wild goose chase and get to colonizing already?

>>8046180
If they were faking it why would they leave it looking exactly the same? The ridiculous level of similarity actually makes it more unlikely to be fake. Like come on how are you going to run a multi-million dollar fakery operation and do nothing else but airbrush out the trees and mexicans?

File: 1462024766216.png (404KB, 853x480px) Image search: [Google]

404KB, 853x480px

>>8046180
>that twilight zone episode where astronaut thinks he's stranded on an asteroid
>faggot is just in the Nevada desert

>>8045854
Phobos would make for a very handy platform for s space station though

>>8045854
No mag-net-o-sphere.

We would have to live underground.

>>8045854
>Crash moon, creating nuclear winter
>Lower planetary temperatures even more
>?????
>Move to newly habitable planet

>>8046184
>probably never has been
This is very far from certain

File: 1455213285574.png (192KB, 501x445px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 501x445px

>implying I'd sacrifice my gains living on a planet with gravity that low

You manlets can have Mars.

So what exactly does this impact do? I hear this theory all the time, but nobody ever explains exactly what we would do with Mars after the collision and how it helps make it more like Earth. To me, it seems like throwing debris into the atmosphere would just make it more difficult for surface operations.

>>8046205
Thicken the atmosphere and fill it with more useful gasses. An iceball would be better though

>>8046209
So what do we do with these gases?

>>8046222
Breathe them eventually

>>8046184

>completely missing the meme of the post

>>8045854
>There is literally no reason to not terraform Mars by nuking Phobos out of orbit.
You say that like it's easy.... or even possible.

File: phobos passes deimos seen from mars in real time.gif (2MB, 243x156px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 243x156px

>>8046284
Well, a single tsar bomb could do it probably. It's blast radius was about 50 miles. Compare that to the relatively tiny 20 mile Phobos.

>>8045854
>Give me one good reason we shouldn't nuke Phobos out of orbit, /sci/.

because its the perfect candidate for a colony ship.

>>8046359
Blast radius in space is much smaller than in an atmosphere

File: 1460485452320.jpg (18KB, 258x314px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 258x314px

>>8046171
>>Nature exists for a reason
>implying the universe has a reason

File: cats.webm (882KB, 400x224px) Image search: [Google]

882KB, 400x224px

>>8046359
>tsar bomb
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba
>Weight 27,000 kilograms (60,000 lb)
Meanwhile, the heaviest thing we've ever sent beyond Earth orbit is::
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobos_program
>They each had a mass of 2600 kg
So, ten times the mass of the biggest thing we've ever sent to another planet...
And I've got to ask, did you really do the math on 50 Megaton blast vs 1.066*10^16 kilos of rock?
...or did you just Google "biggest bomb ever built"?

>>8045896
Why did Japan get so fucked, then?

File: 1456005801841.jpg (17KB, 260x384px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 260x384px

>>8046393
What do you fucking think m8.

File: 1420732120856.jpg (45KB, 463x495px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 463x495px

>well congratulations, you got yourself in orbit, now what's the next step of your master plan?
>CRASHING THIS PLANET WITH NO SURVIVORSH

>>8045945
It's not nature, it's fucking rocks.

File: This is the hole in your logic.jpg (813KB, 1280x857px) Image search: [Google]

813KB, 1280x857px

>>8046180

File: AliensCarterburkealiens.gif (52KB, 321x240px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 321x240px

>>8045876
Weyland-Yutani Shill detected.

File: image.jpg (13KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 200x200px

>>8046409
You can go for a walk in Hiroshima right now, there is probably a McDonald's within 1km from ground zero.

>>8045896
Not really no. Air bursts prevent massive fallout due to better dispersion patters. If you dropped a nuke directly on to something a good amount of radioactive material would embed itself into the earth.

File: 54cadfafdc050_-_solar-superstorm-0112-ld52fm-xln.jpg (38KB, 855x575px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 855x575px

>terraforming a planet that doesn't have a magnetic field or ozone layer

what's the fucking point

>>8046727
>ozone layer
terraforming would GIVE it an ozone layer

however you are still right because
>doesn't have a magnetic field
is pretty damn important, and that's not going away anytime soon

>>8046732
>terraforming would GIVE it an ozone layer
how, exactly?

>>8046727
couldn't we just restart the core?

>>8046743
>couldn't we just restart the core?
God forgot to install a crank handle.

ozone layers are CREATED by the sun hitting oxygen...

File: 1460337172719.jpg (142KB, 422x422px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 422x422px

>>8046204
They'd actually grow taller than the average human.
Just more spindly and weaker without constant exercise.

Higher gravity drives more bone density, shorter stature, and heightened immune, cardiovascular, and muscular structure.

Space faring manlets will rule the worlds.

>>8046743
Increase its mass 10x.

>impossibly porous
Can you please explain this bit further for me? Why is it impossible?

>>8045854
Well before we nuke Phobos (if we do have a powerful enough nuke to do that) can at least mine it?

File: 1448442640910.jpg (68KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1280x720px

>>8045854
No! No nuking qt moons! Phobos is for headpats only!

>>8046905
opkankeren met je kankershit

>>8046184
muh Ann Clayborne

>>8046737
Producing ozone from freeing all the trapped oxygen in the soil and atmospheric CO2.

File: Eso1509a_-_Mars_planet.jpg (51KB, 1024x629px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1024x629px

>>8046732
>however you are still right because
>>doesn't have a magnetic field
>is pretty damn important, and that's not going away anytime soon

Would it be possible to synchronize the moons' orbits so that their gravitational tugging heats up the planet's core.

Yes, I know that Phobos and Deimos are incredibly small compared to most things, let alone Mars, and that it would have probably little to no effect, but it's fun to think about.

File: mars-soon.png (79KB, 960x600px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 960x600px

>>8046194
Once a heavy atmosphere is in place the ionosphere will block most of the really harmful radiation, converting gamma rays into UV rays, but we would still need to build habitats mostly underground such that the population could retreat to radiation shelters should a solar flare erupt towards Mars.

A geomagnetic field isn't needed to make Mars haibtable.

WORST CASE SCENARIO:
The mother of all solar flare erupts, sirens go off, and millions of Martians on the day side retreat to their sheltered homes. The flare hits the atmosphere bathing the surface of the planet in intense UV rays. Plant and animal life out in the open dies, but seeds and roots just below the surface regrow quickly and lucky animals repopulate almost as quickly.

An ecological disaster to be sure, but far from a deal breaker.

>>8045876
>putting a dead planet's welfare before humanity
its dead you moron.

You gonna prevent the mining of asteroids because one might have a fossilized bacterium?

>>8047151
You, I like.

Launch or build solar sails in space, use them to slowly carry cargo like robotic construction equipment for human colonies, and then re-purpose the sail as a solar mirror to melt the CO2 ice caps. After several generations there will be enough to make Mars a pretty warm place.

>>8046186
>4
>that twilight zone episode where americans are convinced they landed on the moon

oh... wait

File: 1459641814317.jpg (82KB, 580x580px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 580x580px

>>8047763
>The flare hits the atmosphere
>atmosphere gone
>mfw no magnetic field

>>8046409
Why are you comparing one of the first nukes ever made, over 70 years ago, to the technology of today?

Do you think that mercury is good for you? Or that lead being put in paint is a good thing? 1940 is very different than today

>>8047715

I propose we should just blast Ceres into Mars' orbit and have it become Mars moon.

>>8048185
It took billions of years for Mars to lose it's atmosphere. It isn't a problem.

>>8047710
Geologist here ......... what?

>>8047773
Seal off olympus mons and let the adults play with the surface

>>8048267

musk wants to melt the martian ice caps with atmospheric nuclear detonations.

>>8046436
Nature =/= living you dumb shit. This is why casual astronomy books are under the "nature" section in the library.
>>8046184
>Don't know what's there
>"There's nothing there"
Remember when we though pressure was too high and the water was too dark for anything to live at the deepest parts of the ocean?

File: latest_512_0171.jpg (53KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 512x512px

much better to mine Phobos dry in orbit, to reduce energy spent on sending material into orbit to construct Vesuvius pornographic space stations.

Any Bogdanovists here?

>>8048281
Ok, that's not going to create ozone on any timescale we care about. Atmospheric O2 was created around 2.3 billion years ago from what we learn of Banded Iron Formations, paleosols, and redbeds. Ozone wasn't present in the atmosphere at levels necessary to sustain life for another 300-400 million years (best estimate puts the ozone layer at 1.9 billion years ago).

You gonna wait the 300-400 million years for O2 to form Ozone there bub?

File: mybutt.jpg (815KB, 739x996px) Image search: [Google]

815KB, 739x996px

hmm you would destory this littel ass?

>>8046737
You know what created the ozone layer on Earth, right? The sun.

>>8048281
You know serious scientists working with Musk said it couldn't work after Musk backhandedly threw the idea out there off the top of his head?

>>8048203
I wasn't aware that radiation poisoning was something that we were able to improve on nuclear weapons.

Forgive me, I'm a lowly software developer.

>>8048324
That's how long it took to form naturally. Musk's description was to create what were essentially tiny pulsing suns over the ice caps, which would in theory speed the process up quite a bit.

Not saying it's viable, but we're not necessarily restrained to a millions of years timescale. Think about how fast we were able to affect our own ozone layer just by tweaking CFC emissions.

>>8048281
>>8048324
Why are you worrying about Ozone? I don't think anyone is going to be wearing short sleeves on Mars for awhile and whatever simple life we introduce won't be horribly affected by the extra UV light.

File: 1458593928420.jpg (55KB, 761x720px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 761x720px

>>8046737
It has tons of perchlorates and oxides in the soil.
It's a ball of oxidizer and rust with a thin CO2 atmosphere.

Introduce cataclysmic amounts of heat and destruction then you can shape an thicker O2 atmosphere back up.

>>8048285
>Remember when we though pressure was too high and the water was too dark for anything to live at the deepest parts of the ocean?
No, I don't. Enlighten me.
>Don't know what's there
But that's bullshit. We've had numerous flybys and orbiters and half a dozen landings, most of which have involved months if not years of subsequent exploration. And as far as life goes, they haven't found shit. As for the bottom of the ocean, it took only a single 20-minute visit to confirm that life existed there. Still believing that life exists on Mars passed the boundary between speculative hope and delusion long ago.

>>8048324
>any timescale we care about
>You gonna wait the 300-400 million years

1: yes
2: it wouldn't take that long due to...humans

>>8048442
It wouldn't work. The planet really does need multiple and constant large scale bombardment using moons and giant asteroids/comets in order to create a atmosphere it can maintain.

Why Phobos? Wouldn't Deimos be far easier to crash into Mars than Phobos?

>>8045893
>>8045900
Hell yes. We literally nuke fear while colonizing Mars. I like the psychological kick.

>>8046393
>wikipedia

>>8048680
I advocate solar mirrors.

>>8048530
Because life cannot exist without the ozone layer ... at all. The only exception is underwater which filters out the UV radiation in the absence of the ozone layer. It's why life was confined to the oceans until enough ozone was created to protect surface life.

You'll get far less radiation of any sort on Mars due to the inverse square law and Mars's distance from the sun so I don't know how unhealthy it will be. It's perhaps worth figuring out but I'm a geologist, not a planetary scientist. Still, I can't imagine even at Mars's distance from the sun you'll be completely free from needing UV protection.

>>8048680
>it wouldn't take that long due to...humans
I agree with you perfectly. You're simply not going to form ozone by just simply releasing O2 and waiting for nature to do the rest unless you have patience to wait geological time scales. We manufacture ozone all the time, especially in car exhaust, on the surface of Earth it's pollution. Should be easy enough to make with machines, won't be cheap though.

>>8048827
What about algae just below the Martian regolith? It can photosynthesize and everything.

Otherwise, I suppose we just rely on aquatic photosynthesizing algae. Mars will have large bodies of water once we heat it and even more if we bombard it with water filled comets.

File: 1461923297141.png (178KB, 500x540px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 500x540px

>>8048919
>Mars will have large bodies of water once we heat it and even more if we bombard it with water filled comets.
where the FUCK are you going to get comets from?

>>8045893
"If in doubt, nuke it."

~The human race

>>8049230
The planetary system around Sol.

File: Stickney_mro.jpg (2MB, 1836x1362px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1836x1362px

>>8045878
This.

File: 1387845700574.jpg (1MB, 5700x2064px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 5700x2064px

>>8045965
Would you leave everything behind and go on a 1 way trip to colonize Mars?

>>8045965
>>8050053
It's really disappointing how mundane mars is.

You know? As a kid I always imagined its surface blood red with towering spires of stone and shit.

>>8050053
Yes.

>>8050077
Mars is cool as hell. A geologist's wet dream.

>>8050077
>It's really disappointing how mundane mars is.
My life here on Earth is mundane as well.

Going to another planet has always been my dream.
If I don't have a family by that time I'll definitely go.

Besides, as a software engineer I can still work on Mars for a company on Earth.

>>8050090
>I can still work on Mars for a company on Earth.
Light delay is a bitch though.

File: ayyy.jpg (10KB, 236x205px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 236x205px

>>8046184
>>8047765
Are you two actually too retarded to recognize something that is obviously a quote from a movie? Specifically James Cameron's Aliens?

I would say, "maybe you're just too young," but by now everyone's familiar with that franchise.

>>8047763
>solar flare erupts
>detected with machines operating with signals sent at light speed.
>UV rays travel at light speed
>Receive information to hide to deadly UV rays the instant UV rays obliterate your body.

>>8050156
Solar flares don't travel at light speed, because they aren't entirely light. They are helium and hydrogen atoms. Furthermore there are signs on the stars surface before it happens.

We have had solar flare warnings on Earth before.

>>8050162
>Solar flares don't travel at light speed
Their information does, and more importantly the electromagnetic radiation they give off does. I'll give you detection, but I don't think we're at the point where we have perfect forecasting ability for solar flares.

>>8045963
What do you think we are, fucking Krogans?

>>8050077
You've literally seen 0.000000000001% of the surface. There are probably thousands of amazing sights to be seen.

>>8045872
Self-replicating machines could each generate an electrostatic charge, pulling the dust towards the surface.

File: rockorsomething.jpg (14KB, 150x150px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 150x150px

>>8046746
>God forgot to install a crank handle.
Not that anon but I keked heartily.

>>8048404
Thing is though it could work if we invested enough into it, really anything related to terraforming is "well, it's -technically- possible, but," and then a bunch of reasons why it's absurdly impractical or unrealistic. What's the issue with this plan is the way a nuclear detonation would eject material. I actually work with explosives for a living (well, partially) and a nuke is... well to put it in simple terms, the expansion is too goddamn fast. If you want to eject a lot of material the best way to do it is a slower explosion, something that builds up pressure and comes out as a wide, flat blob that carries a lot of material with it. Instead of a loud "bang" the explosion makes a hearty "whump" followed by a big geyser of soil/rock/whatever.

Off the top of my head you would need an absurd amount of small-yield devices drilled down far enough to get the desired results, but with unlimited time, money, and materials I think anyone with a bit of explosives know-how could pull it off.

>>8050169
>more importantly the electromagnetic radiation they give off does
Not the guy you're replying to but I thought the EM portion of a CME doesn't strip away nearly as much as the ejected particle stream, which is far, far more deadly according to everything I read. Even with an amazing as fuck ozone layer aren't GCR going to be blasting the surface of Mars with relativistic particles anyway? Martian architecture is going to be "anti-radiation" no matter how you slice it unless we somehow synthesize a magnetic field.

>>8050169
>radiation moves at the speed of light

wanna know how I know you don't know what you think you know?

[math]
\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial x^2} = \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial t^2} + tf

[math/]

>>8050318
[math]
\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial x^2} = \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial t^2} + tf

[/math]

>>8047715

Phobos and Deimos are too small to have any interesting effect on Mars, sadly.

>>8047715
I love that image.

File: red-mars-183x300.jpg (23KB, 183x300px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 183x300px

>>8048315
Just me then? Alright.

>>8050110
14 minutes, it just means that any back-and-forth communication isn't very feasible.


If your boss could only bother you every half hour, good lord I'd get so much more shit done.

>>8050585
Bogdonov a shit, Nadia is the true hero of Mars

>>8049230
There are tens of thousands of them flying around. If we can colonize mars, we can redirect a comet

>>8050591
Nadia was a Bogdanovist. She fucking crashed a moon into Mars when Arkaday died.

>>8050602
She was arkady's girlfriend, and became a sort of weak bogdanovist in the end. She most mostly apolitical though. And she crashed the moon because it was killing people

>>8050606
BOGDANOVISTS ARE MARS!

>>8050624
They design pretty buildings and blow shit up, which makes them cool. Nadia builds shit and makes people get along, which makes her awesome

>>8050634
I get it, you like Nadia (Sax is my favorite), but like you said, she is one of us.

>>8048231
How hard would it be to push Ceres into Martian orbit?

>>8050857
>>8048231
It would be ridiculously hard. This would be a planetary scale collision not seen since the formation of the solar system. The debris it would kick up would annihilate everything humanity had built across the solar system. Mars 2.0 wouldn't be habitable for hundreds of thousands of years if not more from the heat of the collision.

It's a bad idea unless we are talking post-singularity epic time scale thinking and magic level technology.

Just toss comets at Mars. We don't need an Earth twin. Just a summer home.

>>8050876
we're not colliding ceres with mars dumbfuck

>>8050878
My bad. Please no bully.

>>8050967
too late

>>8050857
Very very hard, especially given you want to leave it in mars orbit at the end

>>8050991
>>8050857
I would imagine such projects would be carried out by getting the largest object we can on an interplanetary trajectory and then begin using gravity assists to siphon momentum from Ceres, giving it to another world like Jupiter. We could have several massive objects doing this, buzzing around the solar system constantly, using volatile on the surface to fuel minor course tweaks.

>>8051013
This is... not a terrible idea. It would take a while but be very efficient

>>8051016
>>8051013
Although slowing ceres down once it got to mars would require a huge amount of thrust

>>8051013
There's an xkcd what-if about the feasibility of using gravity assists to actually move anything.

It's not.

>>8051017
The entire process is about slowing Ceres down. We need to put Ceres into a lower orbit. All we have to do is fork out the energy to make minor course adjustments such that the massive object slingshots around planets in just the right way to set it up for the next pass.

>>8051072
Why is that? I'm skimming the What Ifs that mention gravity assists and I'm not seeing a reason why it wouldn't work.

In Randall's "Stopping Jupiter" What If he is talking about... stopping Jupiter. The problem is that there isn't enough mass in the solar system to do it. But we aren't talking about slowing down Jupiter to a complete stop. We are talking about slowing down Ceres and in so doing speeding up Jupiter just a little.

>>8051073
You would need to slow it down to get a mars intercept, then slow it down even more during its flyby to get into orbit. That last part would need to be done quickly

>>8051104
You're missing the core concept. Even Ceres is on orders of magnitude far larger than anything we have the ability to maneuver.

>>8051166
That's the point. That's the reason we are dumping the momentum into Jupiter or other planets. It's perfectly possible. We simply choose the largest object we can and accelerate it into an interplanetary trajectory. That's the hardest part. The larger the object the shorter the whole task of moving Ceres will take, but we can choose any object within our ability.

Once it gets moving the hard part is over. From that point on it's just math and waiting.

Also Ceres might not be the only project. Going on. Corporation of the distant future may pay for flybys to either siphon off or impart momentum onto objects they are messing around with.

This all avoids us having to burn ridiculous amounts of fuel to push large objects around.

>>8051126
>That last part would need to be done quickly
Else what? I'm having trouble imagining it at the moment.

>>8051236
Or else ceres will fly past mars and you will be back to square one

>>8046542
This

>>8051260
Hmm...

If the hard part is avoiding Mars towards the end while still siphoning off momentum then perhaps we could try giving Ceres an elliptical orbit, taking it's orbit out of the plane of the galaxy, and/or trying to get it into the same orbit as Mars but initially on the opposite side of the Sun? In the final phase we wouldn't be so much parking Ceres in orbit around Mars so much as we are altering both the orbits of Mars and Ceres. Ceres would approach Mars from the front, accelerating Mars and decelerating Ceres. That final major loss of momentum would be due to Mars.

>>8051283
The hard part is turning your intercept velocity into an orbital velocity in the short window you have during a flyby.

I gather you dont have much of an understanding of orbital mechanics, but none of what you just wrote makes sense

>>8051300
I have some knowledge of orbital mechanics, though I've never calculated a gravity assist before. I just have a run of the mill physics degree.

As you pointed out, the hard part is keeping Ceres away from Mars until we have removed as much momentum as possible. An elliptical orbit would minimize the time Ceres interacts with Mars. So would an orbit out of the planetary plane.

Now, imagine that Ceres has successfully been placed in the same orbit that Mars is around the Sun but on the opposite side of the Sun. From that point we need to adjust Ceres orbit to back it up little by little, approaching Mars from Mars's front. Once their mutual gravitational tug becomes significant Ceres will begin to lose speed and Mars will gain speed. Mars will get nudged out into an ever so slightly higher orbit from the boost and Ceres will fall into an ever so slightly lower orbit such that they don't simply collide, but still close enough that Ceres will fall into orbit around Mars.

>>8051316
I suppose you could, but it would take an insane amount of time and delta-v

>>8051430
Yes, but that's what the gravity assist plan is for. We don't provide the delta V. Jupiter does.

>>8051436
You still need to constantly correct your transfer vehicle

>>8051460
>>8051436
And again, the time it would take is absurd

where you going to get all the nitrogen, hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen?

there isn't possibly enough left frozen or otherwise solid on Mars.

Not to mention that Mars' gravity is too weak to hold enough atmospheric mass, to make decent air pressure at "sea level".

>>8046542
I thought I heard that spiel before!

>>8051473
Icy comets. Burn a few of em up in the atmosphere and you have a much better atmosphere

>>8051460
Correct. You'd need to hit each gravity assist just right to set yourself up for the next one, and that would take "minor" adjustments. Huge accelerators, ion engines, or regular rocket engines fueled by volatiles on the surface would do the pushing. Nuclear reactors or many square kilometers of solar panels would provide the energy.

>>8051478
Well no, since each transfer would result in huge distortion of the transfer vehicles orbit, which would net to be corrected to bring it back to the origin

>>8051482
Wait no it wouldnt you would just need to aerobrake perfectly

>>8051478
The issue is that if your transfer vehicle orignates from say jupiter and then comes in towards a mars orbit for a gravity assist, it will now be screaming out to way past the orbit of jupiter and there is nothing you can do about that without burning off all the excess velocity conventionally, which be exactly the same as if you put rockets directly on the object you wanted to move

>>8051471
Yes, I would hazard to guess it would take upwards of a thousand years. But the thing is it wouldn't take that much effort in the grand scheme of things. Martians would fund the initial infrastructure and acceleration of the transfer vehicle, but then that's that. They just let it keep going for as long as it needs to and voila, many generations later they have a fucking dwarf planet for a moon. Plus the transfer vehicle would might be able to turn a profit. Other groups may pay for gravity assists from the transfer vehicle, moving the orbits of asteroids or getting helping get asteroids spinning for a centrifuge colony within. Also the transfer vehicle would act as a colony itself and even a radiation protected cruise liner.

>>8051494
It would require tens of thousands of corrections, each one require a transit between the orbits of mars and jupiter or Saturn

File: Interplanetary_Superhighway.jpg (429KB, 1024x750px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 1024x750px

>>8051482
No no. I never meant to imply the transfer vehicle would be in one single orbit all the time. It would be constantly meandering around the solar system, getting gravity assists all the time from any planet or object it has to, sometimes spending years nowhere near another planet.

>>8051499
Yes, but nothing compared to the amount of energy required to directly push Ceres. Jupiter and the other planets would be doing the vast majority of the work.

>>8051502
>>8051500
This would take literally millions of years

>>8051492
No? The transfer vehicle would gain momentum from Ceres, rocket into a higher orbit around the Sun, but would get rid of that excess momentum by using a gravity assist around some planet such as Jupiter before hurtling back at Ceres.

>>8051508
>get rid of that excess momentum
Gravity assist give you more momentum, not less

>>8051505
It depends on how big the transfer vehicle is. Cheaper upfront investment by choosing a lower mass transfer vehicle means a longer time frame.

Regardless, this momentum siphoning system is by far the most efficient way of moving large amounts of mass around the solar system.

But honestly, I'm not too infatuated with giving Mars a moon. I'm fine with Martians simply building radiation bunker homes and genetically engineering themselves and Earth life to cope with the lack of a magnetsophere. It's not like the entire atmosphere we give Mars is going to disappear over the course of just a few thousand years. It took hundreds of millions of years for Mars to lose its atmosphere.

>>8051510
It's super simple. Go behind a planet to gain momentum, go in front of it to lose momentum.

>>8051515
>It depends on how big the transfer vehicle is.
Unless your transfer vehicles is a moon, it would take millions of years

>Regardless, this momentum siphoning system is by far the most efficient way of moving large amounts of mass around the solar system.
But it takes millions of years

>>8051521
If the transfer vehicle were a moon then it would take a few years, because the goal is to move a moon.

>>8051530
Precisely. Anything smaller would take absurd amounts of time

>>8051532
>anything more than a few years is an absurd amount of time
Wat?

>>8051539
Any transfer vehicle smaller than a moon would take absurd amounts of time. Not to mention it fuck up the orbits of every other body in the solar system, no to mention by the time you got yourself to jupiter using nothing but gravity assist you are going crazy fast and will burn up when you try to aerobrake

>>8046171

As a consequence of a system of inputs. While we'd like to keep the good thing going with life on Earth, there's nothing of interest in the Martian status quo. It's time to reshape the bitch in our own image.

>>8051518
Thats not how it works, you gain momentum either way

>>8051547
If you have a transfer vehicle the size of a moon it will take one pass. If you take a transfer vehicle vehicle a few times smaller than a moon then it would take several passes. If you use a transfer vehicle a thousand times smaller then it will take several thousand passes. If you use a transfer vehicle a million times smaller then it will take several million passes.

Now, if you HAVE to move a moon, this is the way to do it. You just have to weigh the upfront cost against the project time span. So not another word about this millions of years thing.

Jupiter has a ridiculous amount of mass. It won't be significantly affected by the delta v of moving Ceres to a Martian orbit.

I don't know what the fuck you are talking about with this "burning up" thing.

>>8051569
I promise you that you don't gain momentum either way.

>>8046171
That's what our brains are for, anon. To predict the consequences. If the benefits are large enough then whatever consequences slip through the gaps are still worth it.

>>8051575
It would so much easier and more sane to build a station on the surface that process moon rock into fuel and fires it from a conventional rocket.

>I don't know what the fuck you are talking about with this "burning up" thing.
How do you plan to dump your momentum into jupiter without aerobraking?

>>8051578
Explain to me precisely how a gravity assist ever takes momentum away from the smaller object

>>8051232
Exactly so take the largest object we can send into space and do the math of how many flyby's back and forth between Jupiter and Ceres. Shit we can send multiple a year even and just set up a train of them. Then take note how long the transit time between them would be, even just assuming that Ceres and Jupiter and Mars are all in a good orbital alignment (the Mayans might be able to help you out with this), and explain to me again how this idea isn't completely absurd.

We'd have far better luck lining the hemisphere of Ceres with meme drives, solar panels, and batteries.

>>8051585
If the smaller object passes in front of the planet, then the planet is pulled forward, accelerating it relative to the Sun. Inversely the smaller object losses momentum. Passing behind a planet does the opposite, pulling the planet backwards and accelerating the smaller object.

The gravity assist doesn't require a larger object either. It can be smaller. A larger object just means it is less affected by the gravity assist.

>>8051594
Send into space? No, we would simply accelerate an object already in space, like a very large asteroid, or maybe just commandeer a very large comet.

>>8051585
>It would so much easier and more sane to build a station on the surface that process moon rock into fuel and fires it from a conventional rocket.
No! Emphatically no! The whole point of this momentum siphoning is that we don't have to do the work. We have Jupiter or other planets do it for us by giving them the momentum we take from Ceres.

By doing a gravity assist in front of Jupiter we increase the momentum of Jupiter and decrease the momentum of the transfer vehicle.

>>8051606
I would draw you a picture, but Im sure youre smart enough to imagine it. If we send an object in front of jupiter to dump momentum into it, the object will have to depart from jupiter deeper into the solar system. Then we're gonna need heavy course corrections.

It's like you think that the solar system is just this already set up rube golberg machine just ready for us to drop a rock in it and watch it give mars a magnetosphere.

>>8051618
>the object will have to depart from Jupiter deeper into the solar system.
If enough momentum is put into Jupiter then the transfer vehicle will suddenly find itself near the aphelion of a highly elliptical orbit and begin falling back towards the inner solar system.

>>8051597
No this is 100% wrong. A gravity assist is essentially the two objects swinging around each other, no matter what the angle of approach momentum is transferred from the larger object to the smaller

>>8051606
The insane amount of time and probable technical infeasibility of this gravity assist technique makes it a terrible option to move anything large

>>8051625
>No this is 100% wrong. A gravity assist is essentially the two objects swinging around each other, no matter what the angle of approach momentum is transferred from the larger object to the smaller
If an object spends a short period of time in front of Jupiter and no time in back of Jupiter then Jupiter will be pulled forward, increasing Jupiter's momentum. Now apply conservation of momentum to the transfer vehicle and Jupiter.

>>8051625
dude we've literally sent probes to the sun that used venus to slow their momentum

>>8051628
Nevermind I misunderstood how gravity assists work my apologies

>>8051647
I'm glad I could help someone better understand it. Humanity gains +1 to astronomical knowledge.

>>8051668
I try to own up when i'm wrong about something, so thanks for setting me straight. It makes very little difference to the original point though

>>8051675
What original point was that?

>>8051695
That the best way to alter the orbit of a moon is by a series of gravity assists to shuttle momentum from the moon to jupiter.

My argument is that its a terrible way to do it even though it could be extremely efficient

File: Mars-Terraforming.jpg (2MB, 5166x1275px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 5166x1275px

>>8051700
If you go from a godly energy requirement to a doable energy requirement just by adding 999 years to the project then yes, I think it is a good idea.

By the time any such plan would be considered humans would have been on mars for many many generations. They wouldn't mind having a moon eventually for the sake of their civilization, but they have no problem with waiting. Afterall, the entire terraformation process they have been laboring for has taken this long and will likely never end. An asymptote they will never reach. And the geomagnetic field is something they don't even need in the short term. It's only purpose is to maintain the atmosphere over many hundreds of thousands of years.

The makings of a geomagnetic field in just a few thousand years? Sounds like a bargain to me.

>>8050255
>muh nanobots

Fabric softener does the same thing ya dip

>>8052119
Nanomachines, son!

>>8045878
A truly redneck sentiment that I am wholly behind.

>>8048686
Phobos is bigger and closer, and it's going to be destroyed eventually anyway

B-but my Phobos

>CTRL+F
>monolith
>Phrase not found

It's like you guys don't even know the most exciting thing about Phobos...

>>8045854
Antarctic lichen can survive on Mars, and even grow if placed in protected areas (cracks in stone). Just put it out there and wait a few million years for it to do the job.

>>8045945
>I don't agree with destroying nature
>destroys mines to make metals which he drives, works, eats, is entertained with etc
>destroys trees to make his living conditions, paper, furniture etc
>destroys limited fossil fuel reserves to maintain the entire enterprise
>destroys local oxygen levels when breathing

Get your head outa your ass.
Nature is in a perpetual flux of destruction and creation. All you do every moment is both. We destroy to create. So we're gonna destroy this fucking moon to create living conditions on Mars.

>>8046171
See
>>8057340
And then take a hammer to the head, I swear it can only help.

>>8057082
But daaaad, I want to terraform Mars NOW!

>>8046930
dit ja verdomme

All you need is gravity

>>8045854
Terraforming Mars is to deprive future generations of humans the chance to experience a planet that is unlike Earth.
Humans on Mars should live in above ground or underground bubbles, and should not try to change Mars. Adapt to Mars, don't adapt Mars to you.
Venus's upper atmosphere is a nicer place to live anyway.

>>8057082
Proofs?

>>8057515
Fuck off ann clayborne there are plenty of other bodies in the solar system

>>8057515
thank you. Appreciate nature and individuality. Technocrat fucks like /sci/ are the reason why people had to put their foot down and placce limits on city sizes. Many scientists especially the physicists have zero regard for nature and conservation, its all technology, technology, technology.

>>8057539
Not just the solar system, but the entire fucking universe is littered with lifeless rocks with thin atmospheres. Mars is about as unspecial as they come.

>>8050090
>Going to another planet has always been my dream.

Really? It has? You sure your dream wasn't "I wish I could go on an interesting space adventure" and not "I wish I could go to a barren wasteland where there is absolutely nothing to do for leisure and whose environment is toxic to my species"?

The only people with a valid reason for going to Mars and fucking with it's moons are those who think it's a viable way of securing the longevity of our species in case of a catastrophic event, and even then, the odds of developing a self-sustaining colony on Mars that can expand across it's surface before Earth is destroyed, vs the odds of tech being developed on Earth that could minimize the effects of said catastrophic events before they happen are laughably low.

Gravity well

>>8057515
>>8057546
>let's keep hell around so people can see what it's like

>>8057630
new planet feel

>>8057643
regardless of your disregard for the beauty of nature terraforming will never happen. Its a stupidly expensive, costly and dangerous solution to a problem that is easier solved with a dome. Furthermore we cant even control our own weather. Terraforming is sci-fi pop science

>>8057658
Human's are nature too, buddy.

If we terraform Mars then that's just as nature intended.

>>8057630
I think there's another perfectly valid reason why someone might want to become a colonist elsewhere in our solar system, and you've overlooked it.

Put simply, it's impact. Today there are so many people doing so many things that it's damn near impossible for any one person to have real lasting positive impact. Impact is now possible only if you're rich or you're a genius with the backing of someone rich.

On a new martian colony, on the other hand, every individual going plays a pivotal role. Even a colony janitor or cook plays a crucial role in the success and proliferation of the colony and ultimately mankind's future in space, and if you're someone capable of skilled work, the impact is even more magnified.

People are becoming disillusioned here on earth, especially younger folks. Purpose is crucial any kind of serious space colony can provide that. Yes, it's hard and dangerous, but it's exactly what many are seeking. Colonies can reignite the flame of humanity.

>>8057674
>Put simply, it's impact.
This. Most people who participate in this discussion and others like it seem to forget what people are like. Most colonies throughout human history were formed by people who didn't like their current situation and wanted to start somewhere new, the largest exception to that is "I'm a wanted criminal, better get on this boat."

People need a change of scenery for a variety of reasons, even if the change is terrible. (Greenland was named so, specifically, because it's a frozen piece of shit)

>>8057692
The difference with Mars is that not just anybody would be able to go. They would either be rich or astronauts.

>>8057886
Yes, it'd be that way in the beginning and will stay that way if all we ever have out there are rinkydink science outposts.

However, there are now folks working to 1) make sure that actual colonies will eventually be a thing 2) moving things in the direction necessary to make that possible.

It's still a long shot but our chances of serious Mars colonization actually occurring have become much higher in the past few years.

>>8052150
>>8052119
I didn't say nano. If rovers can mine and build a factory, they've self replicated.

>>8046422
Jupiter is a big planet

>>8058086
For AU

>>8050878
>ceres
We could use it of one of the Galileian moons, to Mars and use it to knead the crust and provide the same affect as the Moon has on Earth. The we could shave off some ice and dump on Mars to up the water level, in controlled amounts rather than cataclysmic crashes.

>>8057630
>Really? It has? You sure your dream wasn't "I wish I could go on an interesting space adventure" and not "I wish I could go to a barren wasteland where there is absolutely nothing to do for leisure and whose environment is toxic to my species"?
I went to Newcastle once so why not the Moon or Mars? Obvious when you think about it, really.

>>8057658
Life is a whole hell of a lot more interesting than lifeless rocks. Study one of the other countless lifeless rocks in the universe or any of the ones that are constantly forming.

>>8057515
>Venus's upper atmosphere is a nicer place to live anyway.

no, Mars is Heaven compared to Venus

File: image.jpg (151KB, 1024x883px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1024x883px

All the sci peeps not knowing the rocket equation and glorifying nukes.

Phobos is a chunck of material the size of London and although not really a ball, at least twice as thick as everest. You are seriously underestimating the energy it takes to move such a thing.

Nukes look impressive, and act imprsssive when it comes to flimsy human buildings but in reality what they are good at is heat stuff up. If you merely exploded one "on" it, you will just succeed in making a spot warm, plus a tiny (tiny!) bit of kinetic energy from radiation pressure and the nukes own material.

For the record. I think it can be done, but it definetly wouldnt be "one" nuke.

It would have to be a variation of the orion pulse drive. Only improving on that by combining it with nuclear excavation. (this means putting it under the surface).

That way, going by some earth nuclear excavations experiments in the past (sedan crater), you could eject something like 12 Million Tonnes of soil and thanks to Phobos tiny escape velocity, eject them completely.

Now you are actually having an effect because essentially now you are using the asteroids own material as propellant.

The rest is plugging the numbers on the rocket equation using phobos weight, the propellants weight and (tricky) the propellants speed.

I am too bored to do so, but I suspect the answer is going to be millions. (Of Sedan crater like bombs)

This is still impressive. We are talking about deorbiting Phobos here with present day technology. We make millions of cars, we can make millions of nukes too if we want to. But it is definerly not "a" nuke.

PS1: You can accomplish the same by building a railgun on it and throwing buckets of material out.

PS2: Although we could do it, myself dont like throwing a thing down a gravity well when it is so hard to bring stuff up. Would be far more interested in fixing the orbit and making it an (island-sized!) space station.

PS3. The reason nukes may look so impressive for asteroid deflections is because a) the targets are generally assumed to be much smaller than phobos. b) a small deflection a long way out can go a long way, if you just want something to miss Earth.

For that matter when it comes to smashing stuff on Mars, I wouldnt be surprised if a comet someplace was much easier to use than Phobos.

And because of their crazy elliptical orbits Comets are also usually "pre-charged" with tons of kinetic energy whilst usually also being much smaller (and thus easier to move). And on top of that they are rich on water too, which is both a greenhouse gas (in vapor form) and good for generally watering things up.

Ps4

>>8061990
fuck off sonygger

>>8051013
Okay, we can get Ceres in orbit around Mars after thousands of years with relatively little hassle, but I don't think that would necessarily give Mars a geomagnetic field.

>>8045854
Isn't Mars already fucked by its solid core and lack of magnetic thingie that deflects solar winds? Terraforming implies more of a thick-ass atmosphere. how much of an atmosphere can has Mars with its mass and with solar winds stripping atmosphere?

>>8062850
Most reasonable plans are aiming for gas giants or their moons.
Though to be fair, only SpaceX has any funding.

>>8062850
Mars losing its atmosphere to solar wind isn't an issue. It would take too long for it to be significant.

>>8058102
4 AU +- 1AU

>>8062896
That's distance from the sun.
0.00095AU

>>8062893
It would occur on a similar scale to Mars forming an atmosphere, so ...

>>8062913
>It would occur on a timeframe to Mars forming an atmosphere, so ...
So insignificant.

Psstpok pls

>>8053709
>bigger
Makes it more difficult.
>closer
Also probably makes it more difficult.
It's easier (in terms of total impulse and delta-V) to push a high object out to C3 then nudge it to a collision course than to deorbit it directly.
>Direct Hohmann deorbit of Phobos
580 m/s
>Psuedo-bi-elliptic deorbit of Phobos
885 m/s
>Direct deorbit of Deimos
672 m/s
>Psuedo-bi-elliptic deorbit of Phobos
559 m/s

So yeah, given that crashing Deimos demands less delta-V, and also considering that it's over 7 times less massive to begin with, it looks like Deimos is a much easier objective.

Not to mention the fact that a parabolic deorbit may be your only option to begin with, since it would realistically take a long time to maneuver either Moon, and steadily lowering the periapsis might result in the moon disintegrating into a planetary ring before it even reaches Mars. By pushing the moon out to C3, it only takes a small nudge to put it on a collision course where it will plummet straight through the Roche limit and collide with Mars in one fell swoop.

All logistics and morals aside, I think it's totally rad that we can even have a serious discussion about divebombing a moon into a planet. You would be crazy to even think of it not even 100 years ago

File: lilniggrewithsax.png (214KB, 362x344px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 362x344px

>>8050053
thee's a little nigger inside that thing and he's holding a sax