in this topic we can talk about the possibilities of colonising moons,planets,ect... within or outside of the Sol System.

so what are our possibilities?

--------------------

Colonizing Mars with terraforming?

Colonizing moons?

creating small artificial planets?

-----------------------------

if you have any other suggestion or idea please feel free to add.

after a couple generations, would people born and raised on Mars or the Moon, be able to return to, and visit, the surface of the Earth?. or would the greater gravity of the earth make this 'difficult'?

Mars's Gravity is just slightly less than that of Earths. but not by much.

Mars gravity is 38 percent of Earth's... more than 'slightly less'...

but thats only really due to the smaller size of mars to earth. but yeah, I think we'd colonize mars and other moons, we humans have a good way with quick adaption, which is why we're still here.

no doubt... but, would the descendents be able to withstand the greater gravity?...

We find many issues related to free fall, or reduced gravity in our astronauts. I think that if we move to Mars, we should be prepared to stay there. It would be difficult for a Martian human to deal with life on Earth.

Well they need to figure it out and work it soon because we are about out of the metals we need here. We need some mines.
What does the moon have to offer in metals?

I wonder if Science can for lack of a better word "clone" metals?

some kind of matter converter?...

well, I mean artificialy creating what allready exist's

matter replicator? like Star Trek?

A replicator can create any inanimate matter, as long as the desired molecular structure is on file,

I suppose that is kinda what i'm talking bout. thanks

, who knows, it might be possible eventually...

There is a huge problem with matter replication. That problen is the most famous equation in scientific history, E=mc². Put simply it means that to create even a small amount of matter you need a vast amount of energy.

Think of how small a hydrogen bomb is compared to the amount of energy it creates. The reaction that produces the explosion converts less than 1% of the mass of the bomb into energy. This works the other way, to create your "cloned metal" with the same amount of mass as one H-bomb you would need to harness the energy of 100 thermo-nuclear devices. Think of the amount of energy required to produce a useful amount of metal!

Even if you could generate and harness this amount of energy (very, VERY unlikely) it would not be economically viable. Firstly the world is far likelier to have an energy crisis before it runs out of metal and secondly for a fraction of the expense of matter replication we could mine the asteroid belt.

allthough ive been wondering does Carbon Fiber make metals pretty much obsolete?

Carbon fibre has it's uses but it will never replace metal for most jobs. In an impact it tends to shatter, take a look at a crash in Formula 1 or Indy car.

very good point. guess it's not likely anytime soon, if ever...

Sadly not, unless Einstein was totally wrong.

Going back to the original point of this thread, colonisation of other worlds, I think it is likely that we will terraform Mars and maybe even Venus one day. However I think we should make sure that Mars is totally devoid of life before we start. Even if there is only microbal life present there I think we have no righ to eradicate it.

given time and incentive Mars seems likely, but Venus has a pressure at the surface about 90 times that of Earth (a pressure equivalent to a depth of 1 kilometer under Earth's oceans); how do you change that thru terra forming?...

terraforming could give such life a second chance as well... just a thought

not to mention venus is EXTREMELY hot!

The whole point of terraformation is to change a planet to make it more earth like. In some ways it would be easier to terraform Venus than Mars. To make Mars a confortable place to live (rather than living your entire life in a pressure dome) you would need to place vast amounts of gases into the atmosphere. On Venus the opposite is true.

Genetically modified bacteria could remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere of Venus whilst adding oxygen. If enough CO2 is removed the surface temperature and pressure of Venus will drop dramatically. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. It is the reason that Venus is so hot. If Venus had an earth-like atmosphere the surface temperature, whilst warmer than we are used to on earth, would certainly be survivable. Before the first spacecraft reached Venus and Mars many scientists believed Venus was more likely to have life than Mars.

Geoffrey A. Landis proposes colonizing the cloud-tops of Venus. Initially, the image of floating cities may seem fanciful, but Landis' proposal points out that a Terran breathable air mixture (21:79 Oxygen-Nitrogen) is a lifting gas in the Venusian atmosphere.

In effect, a gasbag full of human-breathable air would sustain itself and extra weight (such as a colony) in midair. At an altitude of 50 kilometers above Venusian surface, the environment is the most Earthlike in the solar system - a pressure of approximately 1 bar and temperatures in the 0-50 Celsius range.

Terraforming

Space probes in the 1960's made it pretty clear that the surface of Venus is far too hot to support life as we know it. However, the cloud cover supports fairly life-friendly conditions at higher altitudes. Some speculate that spores from Earth could hitch a ride on small passing asteroids and survive a trip to Venus's atmosphere.

Recent spectrographic observations have found carbonyl sulfide in the atmosphere of Venus, a chemical that is very difficult to make via natural processes and usually associated with life

interresting

Whilst it is true that on earth most carbonyl sulphide (OCS) is produced biologically (up to 25% of the modern level of atmospheric OCS can be attributed to human activity) it can also be produced by a reaction with sulpur at high temperatures. As it is highly possible that Venus has active volcanism it is possible that the OCS in the Venusian atmosphere is entirely due to chemical processes.

Colonizing mars with terraforming isnt anywhere in the near future but still a high chance later on, colonizing the moon wont really happen, i cant really see people living on the moon, more like bases for space flights and docks, etc, creating small artificial planets is definatly no where in the near future, doing something like that will take a long time

That depends on how small the small artificial planets are and what you consider the near future.

Satellites are small artificial moons so it could be argued that the ISS is a small, habitable atificial moon. I realise that is stretching the point but a large habitable station is techniacally feasable now.

As for the short term how long is that. Mankind has become a very short term race. We think only a few years ahead. Our governments only look to the next election. this wasn't always the case. The great cathederals (and I'm sure great building of non-Christian faiths) took centuries to construct. People were prepared to design, fund and construct huge projects that they knew they would not be alive to see completed. We need to think ;like that again. If we do then all things are possible.

who will be operating these bases and docks?

the people that built them? lol my point is that there wont be actually towns and such on it

I know, but I offerred the suggestion so we can speculate wether or not it would be scientifically possible.

if in the future we are to create artificial planets. heres a few ideas.

a ringworld: building a decent sized ringworld could be an answer

-for one.... an orbiting ringworld would spin giving it gravity.

-and a ring world would call for easier production that an artificial sphere planet. (in theory)

----------------------------

artificial sphere planets

-again, just something decent sized.

-same basic egineering principles of building a ringworld. except on a larger scale

A *small* planetary sphere would be great, but it would have to be genuinly small like half the size of a small town, out of Earth Orbit could mean engines that shoot fire could be used as propultion for its revolution and rotation, giving it gravity, and ozone could be artificially added and then the lower layers could be filled with nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide to create a breathable atmosphere. Then soil could be added and could be fertilized and treated so the terraformation would give the artificial planet its own cycles of nitrogen c02 and oxygen, so it would turn into a very Earthlike planet.

A sphere would not be a very good shape for such a colony. Rotating the object to provide artificial gravity works only if you live on the inside of the sphere. The problem is that the artificial gravity on the inside of the sphere wi=ould vary wildly from the equator to the poles. At the poles there would be zero G. A better shape for such an object would be either a torus (doughnut shape as used in 2001, A Space Odessey) or a cylinder. This would give a constant artifical gravity over the whole of the space station.

Incidently adding ozone would not be a good idea. At high altitudes in the Earths atmosphere it is useful. It absorbes harmful ultra-violet radiation, reducing skin cancers. At low altitude, where it can be breathed it is actually a pollutant can can cause breathing difficulties and irritation of the respiratory system.

ok.....so a Ringworld would be a better idea then.

so I would assume after creating the exoskeleton of the ring world that the next phase would be creating a magnetic feild?

go nuts... build a Dyson sphere!

nah! Build a Halo!

If we put our minds to it then there might be a chance.