 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Sep 17, 2017 - 8:04 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
spiderich
(Member)
|
Is this theoretically possible? If so, does the technology exist? Could it exist?
Cassini's finale got me thinking about whether or not the water that's under the ice on Saturn's moons, Titan and Enceladus, could be extracted? If so, would the water remain as water?
Could oxygen be extracted from the water (H2O), with hydrogen as a byproduct (which could by used as fuel)? If there's not enough water on one of the moons, could water from the other moon be extracted and transported to the other one?
Titan has an atmosphere, but it's mostly nitrogen, no oxygen. Enceladus has no atmosphere. Titan also has liquid methane. [Please correct me if I'm mistaken about any of this]
If terraforming, per se, is not feasible, could extracting H2O still be possible to create/sustain domed communities (for example)?
Any thoughts?
Richard G.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Sep 18, 2017 - 11:35 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Metryq
(Member)
|
Solium wrote: There are exceptions ranging from chemical competition to neighboring influences.
What is "chemical competition"?
Solium wrote: Venus thick atmosphere is the result of runaway green house effect.
I'd love to hear the explanation on that one. Or maybe you meant the reverse—thick atmosphere causes runaway greenhouse? Technically, that doesn't hold up either, for many reasons.
The "nebular hypothesis" is the accepted model for planetary system formation. That is, an interstellar cloud of "dust and gas" is set into motion by shockwaves from a nearby nova. The cloud begins to spin, condensing into planets and at least one star. The model includes differentiation zones with "dirty snowball" comets on the outside, gas giant planets next, and rocky bodies closest to the star. So far most exoplanetary data conflicts with this model. Orbital mechanics and dozens of other factors also conflict with the nebular hypothesis, but there isn't space to address them here.
The ad hoc explanation "it came from somewhere else, probably underground" is extremely implausible, yet used frequently to gloss over failed models, such as the "dirty snowball" comet idea. We've had about half a dozen or so closeup and/or sample missions to comets, and they've all been desiccated rocks in space. Maybe vast oceans of water are underground!
The nebular hypothesis relies on gravity to amass all the material for planets and moons. And that is why I quoted surface accelerations and atmospheric pressures for Earth, Venus and Titan above. Earth and Venus are nearly alike in surface gravity, so how did Venus end up with such a crushingly thick atmosphere? Titan, with slightly lower surface acceleration than our own Moon, has an atmospheric pressure almost 1.5 times that of Earth! This begs an explanation. Perhaps there is some other mechanism than gravity which compiles the masses of celestial bodies?
Yeah, I know, it all vented out of the ground at exactly the right pace to offset losses over the 4.5 billion years the Solar system is alleged to have been around. There are similar problems in the existence of compounds in both Venus's and Titan's atmospheres that should have decomposed over the age of the Solar system, and/or due to the influx of sunlight. Again, the establishment answer is "underground venting."
Suppose the rates of loss-of-atmosphere and decomposition of atmospheric compounds is correct, but we try to find some more plausible explanation for the continued existence of thick atmospheres and friable atmospheric compounds than "underground venting." Perhaps Venus and Titan are younger bodies, and that the entire Solar system as-is has not all been around for the 4.5 billion years?
Heretic! Burn him at the stake!
Thick atmospheres and their compounds are not the only factors suggesting this possibility. Such a "radical" idea may be wrong, but the establishment model is also heavily flawed. The point is much of what the layman may think we know just isn't so. Much of it is oft-repeated guesswork.
The short answer for the OP is we're not entirely sure of how the planets got here, how their checks and balances work—or even if they have long term balancing mechanisms. The technologies and industrial/economic resources do not yet exist for terraforming. And once they do, we're bound to make lots of trial-and-error mistakes before we get anything even close to what we expect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Sep 19, 2017 - 5:20 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Metryq
(Member)
|
Solium, there's not a lot to say when you don't know the difference between oft-repeated conjectures in science and empirical data. (Don't mistake conclusions for observations.) You must have a science book from 1950 and otherwise fail to keep up with current research that shows the many flaws in older models. I'm still waiting to hear how the runaway greenhouse effect caused Venus's heavy atmosphere and learn what "chemical competition" is.
Spiderich wrote: Okay, so putting terraforming aside, how would enclosed communities be maintained? How would water & oxygen be replenished?
Many futurists have speculated on how self-sustaining, extraterrestrial communities might work. Even with the very best recycling facilities, there is going to be some loss from the system over time. Given sufficient power and raw material, the basics of life might be manufactured in many ways. The Apollo CSMs used power cells which combined hydrogen and oxygen to produce electricity and water for the crew. The reverse, known as electrolysis (applying electricity to water), can produce hydrogen and oxygen.
Many rocky bodies in the Solar system, such as the Earth and some "minor planets" (the IAU's new official term for "asteroids") are composed largely of silicates. Electrical processes, like sputtering, can break down those compounds into oxygen, and ions from the Sun can provide hydrogen. That may not be the easiest or most efficient approach, but it can be done.
Long duration life support systems are likely to be very complex. For example, putrefactive mechanisms can be both a blessing and a curse—such mechanisms might be needed to keep gardens (hydroponic or otherwise) working, but might also get out of hand and destroy the plants. Consider what happened aboard Russian space station Mir.
There are subtleties of the natural environment that we are only just learning about which may be crucial for long-duration life support systems. For example, light causes charge separation in water. Understanding water is vital because it is key to life on Earth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
