Topic: Modest space project idea: Lets make a planet.

[Maxillius]

why don't we just sent our moon a,d Mars's moons to Mars?  I mean, break them all up into tiny bits first, but our moon is more than enough mass to make Mars equal to Earth.

[Stormbringer]

Not really. The moon is a small fraction of the mass needed. Deimeos and Phobos are    microscopic in comparison to the moon.  Put it this way the earth would take about  20(?) perhaps 200 moons to equal it's volume. And pullingthe moon away from earth would cause earthquakes volcanism, gigantic tidal surges and waves floods, perhaps cause weather disruptions and women to have PMS for 28 days straight.    

[nexa1]

Hey... instead of building a new planet... why don't we just move Titan??? Then we could plant a bunch of trees and voila...
 

[Stormbringer]

Titan is a good choice for a terrformable world but without doing much the same to it it would never be earth like. You could build earth like habitats but that would not increase the gravity. It would never be a shirt sleeve environment either. My idea was to manufacture a twin to earth in climate, gravity, and breathable gases. actually the world that could be terraformed into an earthlike world without bombarding it with asteroids and comets would be venus. It is close to earth's gravity and the atmosphere could be cleansed of the sulfuric acid, etc. The upper atmosphere could be seeded with gases that reflect inrared radiation or gigantic mirrors could be orbited around it to regulate the temperature. Movingthe planet would not be necessary. The problem as I see it is manufacturing a rapid means of terraforming the atmosphere. Catalytic elements or geneticly engineered microbes, or plants could conceivably do it. But I have no idea how long the process would take.

[ActiveX]

Why not spark Jupitor?

[Stormbringer]

Estimates of how much mass jupiter would need for stellar ignition have increased from =~jupiter mass to 5,10 or even more times it's present mass. At one time I thought jupiter was on the verge of being a star, it turns out either I got the wrong impression or science's opinion on the subject has been revised.

[ActiveX]

It worked in 2010 I think it was...

[Stormbringer]

2001: A Space Oddesy; at the very end of it.

[nexa1]

 We don't have monoliths anyway.

  I did come across this interesting read tho if anyone is interested about our own solar system.
 solar system

  Saturn's moon Titan

 Here is what I think, and why I think Titan would be better than Venus.Although Venus would be ideal, I don't think that you could move Venus without disrupting the delicate balance of the other inner planets, IE: the Earth, Mercury and Mars.  But you could destroy IO, take all or parts of IO, use the asteroid belt and make a planet big enough for what you are wanting. Plus you already have a heated core and atmosphere with Titan.
 Besides, I am not sure if I understand the whole planetary engine dealie. You can't just stick some thrusters on a planet and move it. The planet still rotates, so unless you stop the planetary rotation (very bad) your thrusters are going to move the planet all over the place.  

[ActiveX]

Pull it with gravity...

[Stormbringer]

In venus's case no moving is necessary. It's orbit is not the reason it is a hell hole. It's atmosphere is. With the right combination of gases it could be forced to have a climate similar to earths tropical zones. Venus gravity equals earth's more or less. It has an active tectonic system and thus a magnetosphere that protects from radiation. It is nearby. The solar radiation would make earth type plants welcome with little tinkering. The other planets and moons would require a lot more work.

[Stormbringer]

planetary engines are possible but way beyond our technology and economy. But if we ignored those inconvenient facts; consider that we could stop the rotation, but with carfully timed thrusts such a fictional engine could apply force in a single direction even if the rotation were not stopped.

Should we have the means to stop the rotation it would only be bad if we did it to a living planet like earth. We wouldn't care if it caused catastrophies on a dead world without an ecosystem or population. The havok would be gone before we inhabited the world in it's new position.

However, your Titan Idea would work if one is postulating the type of tinkering I envisioned anyway. It is one of the options I was considering. I emphsized others to get a conversation started without muddying the issue more than it already was. There are so many options all of which hypothetically are doable and (given certain assumptions are accepted) reasonable and logically consistent.    But since not many people have picked up the gauntlet I threw down I see no reason why we cannot discuss Titan if you like.  

The jovian and saturnian mega engineering  are good options minus the new sun thing, unless we go so far as to combine all the gas giants (and likely not even then.) Still there might be other options available to reach stellar ignition.  And Titan is a wonderful world that SF writers have targeted for colonization for a longtime with and without terraforming.  

[Stormbringer]

Speaking of Venus:   I see no reason not to terraform it. After all, we are "Vene-forming Earth right now.  

Ha! I kill me! (I just had to say it 'cos it struck me as funny. We now return you to your regularly scheduled political bickering.

[nexa1]

 You are right, Titan would be too much of an engineering feat...so... I woudn't mind if we did turn Venus into a habital planet. But I still think that we would have to move it. Here is why, lke you were saying about plant's needing to be "tweeked" because of the radiation, so would people and animals. Another thing is that even if we did fix the atmosphere, it would still get pretty warm there. I think I read somewhere like 140-170 deg in sun to 75-90 on the dark side. But that might be fixed with a modified planetary shield, perhaps. But here is my main reason for moving Venus. If we were to fo through the effort of making a new planet, I would want it to have rings and a couple moons. Which I don't think would be possible being closer to the sun. So I say just move it. Now ActiveX was on the right track with gravity. just not how he was thinking. We could form a "warp bubble" if you will around all or part of Venus and change it's mass/gravity constant making it easier to move. Then we could use a series of timed thrusts to push it or we could use magnetism to push/pull the planet. (kind of reminds me of an EP from TNG) what do you think?
 I don't like the idea of igniting Jupiter or even making a second star for our solar system. I just see too many bad things happening from that.  

[Stormbringer]

With venus, it wasn't radiation so much as light and soil that the plants did not evolve for handling. Plants have a hard time being grown in zones on earth that they did not evolve in let alone another planet. But as for radiation as we commonly think of it ( Gamma, X ray, Alpha, beta, cosmic  and so forth) , there isn't significanly any difference from earth unless I am terribly misinformed.

While I don't necessarily think such (warp or gravity modification )) tech is impossible. I was extrapolating from known technologies forthis discussion. Warp may or may not be discovered. If not then the whole Idea if it depends on warp  would have to be abandoned. Now warp and gravity mod and other fringe sciences are fascinating and if you want to discuss it   I'd be willing to take it up in another thread if you like.  

[Stormbringer]

Rise! Rise! Rise from the crypt! It's alive! It's aliiiiiiive!

[Stormbringer]

Hmmmm. what has transpired since the last time this topic was discussed? Several planetoids which could supply some mass to the project have been found including some inside earth's orbit.These could jsut be the tip of the iceberg of unknown planetoids.  I think this lays to rests the criticism that there is not enough mass to do what I propose.  Microbes that definitely could survive on Mars have been found. These also are at about the same size as the inclusions in the Mars meteor that was claimed to be possible fossils of microbes from Mars. Remember the studies critics leveled the charge thatthey were too small because no known bacteria on earth were that size. These could be engineered into teraforming machines that self replicate. Telescopes are being built that can detect earth sized planets around alien suns. The president announced his mars and beyond initiative but failed to create funding for it and instead created chaos in planned missions.  

[Stormbringer]

bump  

[Stormbringer]

This may have to be moved to the H&S forum because it may be controversial with some types of people. What if we send a fleet of self replicating robotic tugs, solar collector oven satellites and ancilliary equipment to the asteroid belt. They would manuever asteroids into proximity of one another then weld or melt them together until enough mass was accumulated to cause gravity to finish the work of constructing a terrestrial core approximately the same size as the earth's core. Then carbonaceous or nonmetalic asteroids could be processed to form a mantle and finally a crust. The protoplanet could be constructed in such a way that it's solar orbit could be stable and it's spin rate could be controlled as it is built up so that it could be near the earths. Either the original fleet working in the asteroid belt or another dispatched to the ort and kuiper belt could use the materials there to pelt the dry planet with water and gases to become an atmosphere. The gas mixture could be altered so that the distance from the sun is mitigated by greenhouse gases. The limited but self replicating fleet could enable this be done in an amazingly short time (relatively speaking.) This would have several benefits.Firstly it would get rid of most of the larger earth endangering debris in the solar system. Secondly it would in due time give the burgeoning population somewhere nearby to go to. Thirdly it would develop a knowledge base for terraforming and environmental disaster control. It would spare the existing planets from the environmentalist controversy likely to ensue if someone decides to terraform Mars, Venus, Titan or other worlds. (this would destroy any chances of finding either life or evidence of past life on those worlds.) The only thing I'm not sure in regards to constructing a planet are in regard to creating the dynamo needed to create a molten core necessary for a magnetosphere.  

[Sethan]

Quote:
 It would spare the existing planets from the environmentalist controversy likely to ensue if someone decides to terraform Mars, Venus, Titan or other worlds. (this would destroy any chances of finding either life or evidence of past life on those worlds.)  

What makes you think it would stop the militant environmentalists?  There might be endangered microbes living on some of the asteroids you're planning to use to make that planet, you know.