The Mars Rover Made It!

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I wonder if they’ll find anything of use to support the idea of terraforming Mars?[/quote]

I’ve seen grand ideas about putting an atmosphere on Mar through components in the crust, but even if you do that, you still don’t have a magnetosphere assuming the scientists are correct about Mars’s core being totally solidified. [/quote]

While this is true, surely there is a way to depend on (at least temporarily) man made structures to help overcome this?[/quote]

If you need domes or something like that to protect people from excess solar radiation, then I really don’t see the point in making the atmosphere okay for life. It would seem to me to be more practical to just use what’s on Mars for the individual domes than doing that for the whole atmosphere.[/quote]

Terraform whole planet = more livable area?[/quote]

Then were back to the lack of a magnetosphere problem and how to replicate that on a global scale.[/quote]

Magnets[/quote]

The earth is a giant electro-magnet. You have the outer core circling around the inner creating the magnetosphere. You’re talking about an enormous feat possibly even greater than creating an atmosphere on Mars.

Hey, DrMatt, if you come through this thread, I sent you a pm.

Edit: Hey DrMatt, a precambrian geologist with expertise in sedimentology and stratigraphy and geochemistry" at my university was able to get back to me, but I’d still be interested in your thoughts to my question.

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Hey, DrMatt, if you come through this thread, I sent you a pm.

Edit: Hey DrMatt, a precambrian geologist with expertise in sedimentology and stratigraphy and geochemistry" at my university was able to get back to me, but I’d still be interested in your thoughts to my question.[/quote]

I just checked my PMs and don’t have anything from you. You should send your question again, or you could post it here if you want.

It had to do with the accuracy radiometric dating of sediment layers between fossils, and the radioactive decay of certain isotopes. The professor at my university told me about how zircon is useful and that “…scientist date now 1.6 billion years old rocks with a precision of 100 000 years. Cool?”

Here’s the question I sent him:

[quote]I have a question regarding radiometric dating. My friend and I are
having a debate.
Anyway, she visited the Royal Tyrrell Museum b/c I told her that it
was a cool place to check out while she was in Alberta.
So the paleontologist there told her about radiometric dating, and
that scientists are unable to date the fossils, so they date the
sediment above and below where the fossil is found. Which makes sense.
But now I’m wondering, as is she, that if you’re dating the sediment,
how do you know when it began to decay? Where my understanding is, is
that the rock/minerals would begin decay after they have formed(not
when it settled but when the magma or lava cooled or however
rocks/minerals come to exist), but, IMO, that leaves the door open
that the rock/mineral could have come to exist well before the
dinosaur died.[/quote]

Thanks Dr.Matt

Nevermind. This was gonna be to Matty.

terraform of Mars = easy

just drop a couple of ice / carbonaceous chondrite asteroids on that big red god in the sky
just go to the local parking bay (aka asteroid belt) find the relevant rocks and place small chaep ion engines on them and aim at Mar’s orbit.

wait a few decades and viola

insta atmosphere + free water

[quote]ShaunW wrote:
terraform of Mars = easy

just drop a couple of ice / carbonaceous chondrite asteroids on that big red god in the sky
just go to the local parking bay (aka asteroid belt) find the relevant rocks and place small chaep ion engines on them and aim at Mar’s orbit.

wait a few decades and viola

insta atmosphere + free water

[/quote]

That might be a start, but then you have to figure out how to get everything in perfect proportion. Even if you can do that, you then have to figure how to sustain those proportions. On Earth, it’s done through some very complex and dynamic systems.


.
Try this again, just go here
http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/music_movies_girls_life/demotivational_posters_random_pics_90?pageNo=21#5357020

(appropriate!) Resurrection of an old thread.

2 Likes

Perseverance rover successfully lands on Mars, a key step in NASA’s search for signs of life

To me, the most amazing thing about this is that it proves that there’s still signs of (intelligent!!!) life on Earth…

1 Like

I’m actually really interested in the rover’s missions going forward. They got tons of good info out of Curiosity.

I think Perseverance is the 5th rover sent there?

Damn kudos on this. I think almost everyone here would have started a new thread. Either your memory rocks or you think about searching before starting a thread which most don’t (and I’d put myself in this category most of the time.)

Absolutely. I really enjoy seeing what these rovers show us. Incredible stuff.

1 Like

It’s really incredible. What other time in history have we (as spectators) been able to have front row seats in color and hi-dec for the exploration of another planet?

Also, unrelated but still related, The Martian is possibly one of the best movies ever made

1 Like

One of the coolest things since they faked the moon landing!

1 Like

I was watching How the Universe Works on Science channel, and they described how the previous rover was solar powered and was snuffed out by a massive dust storm (apparently one of the great Martian natural dangers) that lasted days, during which the poor rover’s batteries slowly drained out.

…I actually felt sad for the rover…

So of course this one is now nuclear powered -so awesome.

Supposedly, there is a manned mission to Mars on the drawing board, but the challenges to overcome sounded so daunting that, unless there was the same kind of gung ho, full speed ahead at all costs environment that existed for the moon landing, I doubt that the money or the will to overcome said challenges will be there.

1 Like

Oh I think it will happen in due time no doubt. We will continue to make advancements that reduce those challenges. Now I wouldn’t take massive bets on when or anything (I think NASA’s stated goal of 2030 sounds incredibly unlikely) but between NASA and the private companies now invested in more and more space research it will happen sometime).

Is this the article you referenced? If not it’s a pretty cool read on some of the things you mentioned challenge wise. I’m pretty interested in this stuff if you have something else that goes into it.

Oddly enough though I’m not even a Star Wars nerd…my nerd stuff is Batman, video games, and JRR Tolkien. But the idea of being in space is just insanely cool.

They SERIOUSLY upgraded their movie set tech. Like, it could almost be Avengers worthy now. Go NASA.

It’s funny you say that, I kinda did too lol. But give me a radioactive rover and we are in business now!

I actually think that the technical challenges can be surmounted, no matter how daunting they are. But I do believe that the environment that we had in the Apollo days needs to come back if we’re going to make it work. I simply do not see any way NASA can make it happen without the same attitude at all levels of leadership in the government.

I do think that Elon musk is capable of delivering on at least some aspect of his goal to set supplies or people on Mars. But without concerted national will I don’t think it will be enough to sustain any prolonged exploration. And I definitely don’t think he’s going to do it on his stated timeline haha.

Although, he did figure out how to catch a de-orbiting rocket with an AI controlled ship in the middle of a freaking ocean with a freaking “bigly net” so… I’m not going to doubt him any more :joy:

2 Likes

You, sir, are a fine scholar and a gentleman.

1 Like