Live data from Hacker News

Why is Venus hell and Earth an Eden?

quantamagazine.org

101–110 of 358 posts

Re: Why is Venus hell and Earth an Eden?

#101
post #62

> For a time, the mantle would get hotter, since the shell around it would trap heat generated by radioactively decaying compounds inside it. As heat accumulates in the interior, the Earth in Kane’s simulations would experience an uptick in volcanism lasting for about 15 million years. That totally surprised to me. I had no idea radioactive decay played such a role for earth. It turns out I must have fallen sleep in…

The only context in which I heard it mentioned is the idea of trying to date the earth by its temperature. Assume it was a hot molten mess in the past and has been cooling down ever since. Factor in the rate at which it would radiate heat and all of the energy coming from the sun and... you conclude that the planet is very young. Because you didn't account for radioactive material within the planet, keeping it warm.

Re: Why is Venus hell and Earth an Eden?

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tectonics isn’t the issue There would be little point in terraforming Mars. There’s plenty of places on Earth to terraform

Agree. But my understanding is the main idea is Mars is supposed to be a "backup" for humanity in the event of a very-low-probability catastrophic event on earth (total nuclear war, solar flare, meteorite collision). In our lifetimes, unlikely. Over the next 1 million years? Maybe.

I think people misunderstand this goal. It's not 'backup' as in, 'ok, Earth is toast - everybody go live on Mars now.' One of the thing critics get right is that in the overwhelming majority of species ending events on Earth, Mars would still be less hospitable than Earth would. For instance take a massive asteroid impact. It's not the impact that kills you, at least not most people.

But what would happen following a major asteroid impact is a massive amount of matter entering into the atmosphere and effectively blocking out the sun. This results in plantlife dying off which then results in the rapid death of everything on up the foodchain - we starve to death. Yet you'd still mostly be able to breathe the air, your blood wouldn't boil on atmospheric exposure, and so on - it'd still be a rather more pleasant place than Mars.

What Mars can offer is (1) a parallel civilization that can continue on and (2) a lifeboat to Earth. People can return, help reorganize systems of governance and restore order, rescue survivors, and generally get started rebuilding Earth in the case of a mass extinction event. "All" we need from Mars is for it to be relatively self sustaining. I say relatively in that it can provide for the basic necessities - food, habitation, energy, reproduction, and maintenance/repair/replication of those basic necessities. Everything else is a luxury.

And the timelines for that are far closer, even within our own lifetimes. I think this will become more clear over the next decade. China has generally been quite conservative with their space goals and overperforming, and their stated goal for the first crewed mission to Mars is 2033, and every 2 years afterwards to follow indefinitely, as part of a plan to establish a permanent presence on the planet. The first Starship launch to land on Mars will also likely be a game changer for people.

Re: Why is Venus hell and Earth an Eden?

#103
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. But my understanding is the main idea is Mars is supposed to be a "backup" for humanity in the event of a very-low-probability catastrophic event on earth (total nuclear war, solar flare, meteorite collision). In our lifetimes, unlikely. Over the next 1 million years? Maybe.

If you want a backup, why use Mars? You can create habitats from scratch, or you can have colonies on the moon. Even Mercury is better than Mars.

> Even Mercury is better than Mars

...how? It's further. It has no atmosphere. There is no water or carbon.

Re: Why is Venus hell and Earth an Eden?

#104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. But my understanding is the main idea is Mars is supposed to be a "backup" for humanity in the event of a very-low-probability catastrophic event on earth (total nuclear war, solar flare, meteorite collision). In our lifetimes, unlikely. Over the next 1 million years? Maybe.

AFAIK - of those, collision is the only one which could plausibly make earth less habitable than a substantially terraformed mars.

The Sun will get hotter over time and expand, eventually descendants will have to decamp to elsewhere, like Mars.

Re: Why is Venus hell and Earth an Eden?

#105
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny that you're using the word "deserve". Based on whose moral framework? I'm not sure current moral frameworks on Earth would be against colonizing the Universe if it was possible.

Its not even about deserving it. How are going to maintain a terraforming project or build habitable orbital platforms if we can't manage keeping our natural habitat habitable?

[deleted]

Re: Why is Venus hell and Earth an Eden?

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s part of it but the dense CO2 atmosphere is the major issue. Don’t worry, we are trying to get there as fast as we can to Hell as well.

What’s the worst case CO2 on earth? Is it as bad as Venus?

Almost the entire length of the linked article is spent answering that question in detail.

Re: Why is Venus hell and Earth an Eden?

#107

> Why Is Venus Hell and Earth an Eden? Because humans evolved on Earth and not on Venus. If we evolved on Venus then it would be our Eden. > They’ve been pushing their model Earth to its extremes Is your model anywhere good enough to be able to get useful outcomes from this process? I would suspect not. I mean, we know this planet's state is partially owed to the many unique comet impacts that have occurred during it…

There are real limits to what life can be supported due to basic chemistry/laws of physics. e.g. "Venus is so hot — hot enough to melt lead — that the acid rain evaporates as it’s falling." That life evolved on Earth and not Venus is not an accident.

Merely "because humans evolved on Earth and not on Venus" is just a dismissive contrarian take that says absolutely nothing of any value what-so-ever.

Re: Why is Venus hell and Earth an Eden?

#108
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. But my understanding is the main idea is Mars is supposed to be a "backup" for humanity in the event of a very-low-probability catastrophic event on earth (total nuclear war, solar flare, meteorite collision). In our lifetimes, unlikely. Over the next 1 million years? Maybe.

If you want a backup, why use Mars? You can create habitats from scratch, or you can have colonies on the moon. Even Mercury is better than Mars.

Lots of reasons for this. The Moon is a complete hell hole - 2 week long nights, night time temperatures that drop to around -200f, daytime temperatures in excess of 250f, extremely low gravity (to the point that one might expect a higher impact of the countless health consequences of 0g exposure on humans), minimal material resources and so on. There is also no atmosphere at all which complicates landing, means even the smallest micrometeorite will impact the surface (which is why the Moon looks like it does), and contributes to highly dangerous particular dust everywhere - much worse than than on Mars.

By contrast Mars is bizarrely similar to Earth. It has almost identical axial tilt resulting in a similar seasonal cycle, a similar annual cycle, extensive mineral resources, some atmosphere simplifying landing - providing protection from meteorites, etc. It has temperature ranges that, like Earth, vary wildly due to seasonality, but are locally consistent. For instance on a summer day near the equator, it hits about 20C on Mars. If not for the blood boilingly low atmosphere, it'd be down right comfy.

Anyhow, kind of a rambling disorganized comparison because I'm in a rush - but yeah, Mars is almost eerily Earth like. In that if life was a video game Mars would be the kind of obvious 'next level', to a degree that makes it feel scripted. Even some chemical reactions like the Sabatier Reaction [1] (Martian atmosphere + electrolyzed ice => methane + oxygen + water) just feel too convenient to be true, but they are.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction

Re: Why is Venus hell and Earth an Eden?

#109
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The crazy ones are the ones that get sh*t done. Musk was initially written off initially as crazy for every one of his successful business ventures. And it's his money to spend as he sees fit.

Musk is a visionary in the sense that he bought an EV company and took government contracts to mass produce NASA engine designs and launch military and civilian coms networks. Nobody has deeper pockets than Uncle Sam.

The "EV company" he bought consisted of an office and a desk and a kit car. There was no design, not even a plan.

If it was so easy designing and launching rockets for 10% of the cost, why didn't anyone else do it? Why did nobody else make reusable rockets? Rockets that could land on the launch pad? The rapid turnaround and cadence of launches?

Musk did what NASA was unable to do.

BTW, the Saturn V rocket engines were scaled up V2 engines. The essential bits were from the V2 engine - cryo fuels, turbo pumps, nozzles cooled by the fuel, boundary layer cooling, baffles to make the engine stable.

The Saturn V engines were lovingly built by hand. Musk's engines are mass produced.

Re: Why is Venus hell and Earth an Eden?

#110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tectonics isn’t the issue There would be little point in terraforming Mars. There’s plenty of places on Earth to terraform

Agree. But my understanding is the main idea is Mars is supposed to be a "backup" for humanity in the event of a very-low-probability catastrophic event on earth (total nuclear war, solar flare, meteorite collision). In our lifetimes, unlikely. Over the next 1 million years? Maybe.

Yeah, it's full-on fantasy. Why would we as a species waste time terraforming a planet proven to let its atmosphere evaporate into space? Why waste energy to drag materials from Earth there instead of spending the same energy and materials to fix whatever problems Earth has?

At least in a billion years we can expect we would be either extinct already from our own actions, or hope to be advanced enough as a species to move Earth's orbital path out a touch every couple millennia to keep us in the Goldilocks zone.

Maybe by then we can terraform the Mars by crashing a few dozen comets and detritus from the asteroid belt into Mars to keep the Martian iron core, add heat enough to keep it molten and spinning for a while, add enough mass to get the gravity about 9.8 m/s2, reboot a tectonic cycle, combine 2 satellites into 1 good one, and try to add water to the system overall.

You know, just a regular Tuesday for whatever species we evolve into.

Post reply on HN