I like the fact that you used what is most likely the TRUE quote : « That’s one small step for A man », not « one small step for MAN » like many think it is.
I’m curious how space colonies would look like considering that countries would be settling there, not the United planet earth. I’m guessing the first colonies will be by private companies, eventually being either subdivided or federalized.
Either what you wrote, or a united group of companies/countries that eventually factions into separate groups, independent of any country on earth (once Mars becomes self sustainable and independent from earth).
We would need to establish a world government before we get to that point. I wouldn't hold my breath on that in our lifetime. This video simulates hundreds or thousands yesr into the future
Depends! With we are talking about in colonies on the moon and mars then yes you maybe right! But if we were to travel from beyond our solar sistem to another star like alpha centauri we would be a different species like carl sagan said
That's similar to what happens in the Ender's Game series. Many planets seem to be settled by a particular demographic, sort of how a demographic left Europe to settle in America. I distinctly remember Ender living for a time on a planet based on Norse culture.
I find Dyson Spheres super interesting. But the question I had: Any material that close to a star... wouldn't it just melt or evaporate? And how would we get it "around" the star without burning ourselves?
Here's a question regarding travel. Suppose there was a way to get a ship or other Cosmic vessel to have a initial burst of speed we're talking hundreds of miles per hour maybe or even thousands. Now in space there's nothing to slow you down so perhaps one quick burst of power and then "float" at high speed into thr direction of the destination, of course taking into account things in the way like asteroids and other planets. I would compare this idea to speeding down a highway and then throwing the car in neutral to coast for a while. Would that work?
Yes,, there is no friction in space whereas in your car,, you can speed up and put the transmission in neutral and you WILL "coast" for a moment,, but the friction of the tires and the air will slow your car to a stop pretty quickly... but you are still right about coasting in space,, you accelerate and then turn off the rocket or whatever and you'll keep moving until your ship hits something or fall into the gravity well of a star planet moon or whatever...
I’d love to go once it’s safe or safer. I build car and food factory’s for a living. I also build water treatment plants also wind, gas and steam turbines.
The first guy to be in a vacuum chamber in a space suit ( respect ) started coughing blood and passed out in 30 seconds. The emergency team got in there 2 minutes ( i think 5 minutes was considered brain damage ) .
I kind of helped my dad with cars since i was a teenager ( i was the gopher... ) and its crazy what keeps them together. And we know what the space station is made out of 😕 .
2:17 Examination of all the reservoirs of CO2 indicates there's not enough to warm the planet above the freezing point of water. The current pressure is 6 millibars. One millibar of CO2 would bring Mars to 0C. Somehow freeing all the CO2 locked up in rocks and ice would bring the atmosphere to around 20 millibars, as an optimistic estimate. Source: "Inventory of CO2 available for terraforming Mars" Nature Astronomy (2018)
Yeah I like Dave's enthusiasm but sometimes he kinda screws the pooch lol... Okay so there's Frozen carbon dioxide and water on Mars, but consider that if all the atmosphere of Earth were to chill out and fall to Earth as snow, it would result in a layer of Frozen nitrogen and oxygen 10 meters thick... So if there was a glacier the size of Texas and a mile thick at the polar caps of mars, then there would be enough carbon dioxide to definitely raise the temperature however there would still be no oxygen or nitrogen... Add to that the fact that there is not enough water to form a cloud above Mars let alone cause rain,, and add to that the fact that there is no appreciable magnetic field and therefore radiation shielding would be necessary AND any developing atmosphere would be blown away by solar wind...
sir i have a question, the earths gravity hold down the atmosphere, still alot of air get in the space. although mars got less gravity, how it will hold its atmosphere ? isn't its atmosphere will lose in space very quick ?
@@ProfessorDaveExplains sir but if we transform the Mars in far future, its atmosphere will be lost in space too quickly, does mars can create more and more air to hold its atmosphere ? sorry i can't explain my question.
No it's a valid point, the solar wind would strip away any atmosphere we try to install on Mars, so we would probably have to go so far as figuring out how to produce a magnetic field for the planet. Who knows if that's possible!
Great video and I just found your channel. I have a question about terraforming a planet like Mars. If we were able to melt the ice on mars, decontaminate the soil, control the CO2 levels and create an atmosphere, would it then hold up to solar winds and storms as Mars doesn't have a global magnetic field like earth for protection? Basically, if we did all the work needed to make it livable would the planet itself be able to hold it? Then again, humans can always find some way to figure that out. Excellent video and cool channel, I'm glad I found it, thanks.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Mars Express detected them in the southern poles and MAVIN detected auroras as well using its IUVS. So it has some magnetic activity, just not like here on earth. Since the change and loss in its atmosphere occurred because of the loss of its magnetic field do to the cooling of its core, it might be like trying to light a candle in a wind storm. Do you know of anything in that regards had been looked at yet? I'm an idiot when it comes to this stuff, but I do find terraforming and Dyson spheres to be amazing subjects. This is a neat article I did find on the subject. www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/V2050/pdf/8250.pdf Now, if we had an Enterprise... Thanks for replying and again, great channel, keep up the great work.
The main issue is that mars doesn't have enough water or CO2 for a 1 bar atmosphere, it has some but not enough. The main issues are that in mars' lighter gravity you need more air for that 1 bar because there is less force that pushes that air down to the planet. Additionally you can't really breathe CO2 and a pure oxygen atmosphere is also dangerous. This means you need an inert gas like nitrogen or helium. The problem with that is there's no helium or nitrogen on mars. Good news is that helium nitrogen, and water are fairly common throughout the solar system so you can truck that stuff in from the kuiper belt. The magnetic field problem is easily fixed with a floating magnet.
Isaac Arthur does a whole series on this stuff. Just use Solar sails. Focus enough of the Sun’s light into a narrow beam to give your ship a push towards the next star system. You’ll get there in a few decades.
...just use Solar sails? Light is a very very very *very* bad propulsion method. And yeah, Isaac Arthur is off some orders of magnitude in this matter.
@@hanneshuober9275 yes, but actually no. The fastest manmade objetct is a solar sail, so it actually works. The Problem is, that with acceleration, mass and g-forces rise, and life on a Shuttle like this would need a lot of live-stabilizing systems.
The thing is tho is that our solar system gives us everything for colonization of planets within our system and resources to build a Dyson swarm. we just have to harvest mercury to start the swarm and Venus has the necessary gases for colonization.
How can you make a video covering terraformimg Mars without mentioning the lack of a magnetosphere? Any artificially created atmosphere would be blown away by solar radiation.
@@gwynbleidd1917Yeah but the only "solutions" coming from most people still include the biggest non-sustainable aspects of modern civilization,, like cars........ Of course it's nice to be able to haul around a ton or two of steel etc to be able to protect you from your own fear of other people,, and the convenience of being able to travel at a mile a minute or more is really cool but unless we're going to make one of these things for every person who wants one, there's always going to be the haves and Have nots and civilization doesn't do very well with that sort of structure.... also with the vehicle transportation matrix,, as much space is devoted in the typical urban area to cars as there is to people, which is a really stupid way of doing things because people become so lazy and also so entitled that an urban area pretty quickly becomes an anxiety zoo with stupendous resources being poured into projects that save people a couple of minutes... it's insane and the anxiety produced makes people want to spread out even more which produces suburban sprawl which is destroying ecosystems all over the planet...
once our civilization reaches 1 on the Cardashev scale from 0,75 that we are now and witness the extinction of flat earthers, then we'll be able to colonize other planets.
As soon as 5G satellite networks make internet/signal available and better in remote Earth places, as well as densely populated cities- we should start seeing a massive increase/shift in overall human mass consciousness, enabling more organised/synchronised work in a more focused manner towards improvement and creation of new technology, space travel and other STEM fields.
@@MrMichealHouse and that's a good thing cuz if they attack you get arrested and sent to jail. Because Norwegian the fake a chip put inside of them. Will get the addicted to watching movies
@@saberiandream316 most of the time I expect us to just advanced so far beyond them that they become the poor people and the rest of the planet becomes rich
@@Nine-Signs yeah I'm just say this humanity doesn't kill itself this century. we have to paxico the World War 3 in 2156. Or in the humanities a trillion
We're a good species at heart, and are destined to go out into the universe and answer the great questions we all ask (Why are we here? What is this?). Love humanity
By this simplified definition we might very well skip type 1 altogether. There is very little reason to harness all the Suns energy that lands on Earth when you have a cheaper and better source available (namely nuclear). On the other hand for a habitat in the Dyson swarm of type 2 civ it makes perfect sense to use mirrors and harness the solar power because out there that method is the simplest thing to do.
no, because the sun itself is a nuclear fusion reactor. we are not skippping type 1 when harnessing fusion energy, because it's still just the planets' ressources.
@@kaantax8666 Well that would make no sense though ... You could use up all of Earths hydrogen and far exceed a type 2 civilisation if you did it quickly enough. So the division between type 1 and type 2 is meaningless when you don't know which is higher up
For detonating the ice caps on Mars, wouldn't there be issues with the new atmosphere being stripped away from the planet by solar wind, similar to what happened earlier? What could be done to prevent that from happening again?
@@ProfessorDaveExplains So, do you think you humans would be able to heat up mar's core once again to reignite the magnetic field or would that be an impossible task? Now I'm a star so my knowledge on planets isn't perfect so this question my not account for everything.
There is a reason for the low atmospheric pressure on Mars: the lower gravity forces. The created oxigen and water vapour might disappeare in space as well.
Dyson Spheres are inherent anachronisms, because any civilization with sufficient resources to build one would have already overcome the problems the sphere itself is supposed to solve. Hence there would be no reason to pursue it. A person with a healthy scientific imagination could more rightly expect that higher levels of technology would allow for other more efficient and effective ways to harness energy at that scale.
Setting aside things like cosmic radiation and non solar bodies entering the system, is there enough matter in the solar system to make even a ring around Sol? If the width of the ring matched the diameter of the earth what would be the gravitational effect on the mass in any given Earth sized area and how would it maintain its plane? What would keep the matter from wanting to collapse back into a sphere? I know I went far into the theoretical on this but I really do want to know if there is even enough matter in the system to attempt a ring let alone a Dyson's Sphere.
If we lived on the interior of a Dyson sphere, we would be in zero g, and might drift away from the surface. The net gravity inside a symmetrical sphere is zero.
Think of Dyson spheres as a massive veil of solar panels enveloping most of the sun (from a safe distance, of course). A solar panel doesn't need to be more than a few mm thick (2-4mm). We need Dyson spheres for harvest the energy of the sun, not necessarily to live in them. We can still live in O'neill cylinders distributed along the Dyson sphere veil. You can picture the Dyson sphere as a sea, and O'neill cylinders as equidistant islands were we would live.
This is really cool. I think you may have made a mistake with Kardeshev scale. There is no definition for a type 0 civilization... I think the simplest reason why is because anything before a type 1 is not truly civilized yet.
the best advice I have for you humans is try to find a red dwarf star with a planet in the habitable zone as red dwarf stars can fuse for trillions of years. and it will make the star happy as they will have a world with life on it, so they aren't completely alone once all the other stars die.
Holy shit!? I’m still new to following this professor. First I see him hilariously debunk that criminal hovind guy now seeing this! These ideas of future technologies is amazing and already seems it’s possible to do! At the age of 35 I hope we do atleast a quarter of that before I die! Great work Dave! Keep up the hard work for reality and moves us forward as a species
Dude you know how big the sun is? No chance in hell we would have any amount of material at any point to build anything around that even 1 ring would be impossible
Love this video. Not sure how old it is but I wonder if you’ve developed the more agreed upon process/sun energy harvester, which is the Dyson Swarm that you stated but didn’t go in any detail onC which is similar but so much different than the Dyson sphere. the Dyson sphere Would be exponentially more susceptible to failure and it would take too much energy in time for it to be very logical to build. A Dyson sphere would be one massive structure, which could be disastrous if a comet or something crashed into it, even very likely destroying it all. It might not be functional until the entire thing is built and finished, which would take a crazy long time, although I’m sure they would figure out how to use part of it at a time as it is built piece by piece... but that’s why the Dyson swarm is just likely so much better. You could build each small satellite and launch it into orbit and already having it working very very quickly in relation to the giant sphere structure, and then that first small one would immediately be sending energy back to the place the rest are being built, giving the energy required to keep building more and more, and the more and more built and launched as quick as possible, the more energy sent back to build more. The logic would be to create a base on mercury as fully automated as possible run by as few humans as needed. The low gravity and close proximity mercury is to the sun would make it that much easier to launch each new unit and get it into place quickly. Then if a rock or comet crashes into the swarm, it might only hit one of them, or just a few, and the rest would be fine instead of the entire structure of the sphere breaking, and even breaking completely. While the sphere would need a ton of energy and time to produce even the first parts of it, the hardest part of building the swarm would be the initial construction of the base factory, as soon as that very first part is built, you can get one unit into position at a time as quick as possible, and keep constructing more and more of the base to keep pumping out more and more faster and faster with each launched sending more and more energy that is required to create more and more. You wouldn’t need to spend anywhere nearly as much on protection because losing one or two wouldn’t mean much at all, while you would need massive protection of the sphere to prevent its total destruction from even just one large meteor or comet or something. Then even if you feel like the swarm is “finished” well, you could keep adding another layer to it, as there would be gaps between each unit, also, you wouldn’t have the problem a sphere would have with our sun, a partial sphere might be okay but still even might take away from sunlight and energy getting to the earth (might help with climate change though lol) but the fuller the sphere the more we take away light and energy from our home planet earth. With a Dyson swarm you could program the orbit of each and every individual unit to avoid the exact place they need to so that the same sunlight and energy still shines onto earth as normal. Anyway, love your videos, hope my comment wasn’t a bore, just love the topic and figured I’d blab about it!
Spoiler: Moonfall actually explores the concept of Dyson spheres and it’s such a good movie. I love it so much. So much fun. Especially since all the info is coming from a conspiracy theorist, but I’m pretty sure I remember even he finds the flat earth theory ridiculous when it’s brought up somewhere in the movie. So fun and interesting.
Is the Mars gravitational field/pull strong enough to hold and maintain an oxygen holding atmosphere over time though? Radiation reaching the surface of Mars, from the sun, is also greater due to its limited ozone layer. If Mars is able to build an ozone layer over time, without being destroyed by continual radiation storms is another question.... Sticking with capsules and underground tunnelling for now :)
As thrilling as terraforming Mars may sound, we must consider many factors. First of all we must take into account interplanetary contamination: If there is life on Mars in the form of microscopic cells or in whatever shape of form, we may end up killing it, or it might end up killing us. If you think bacteria and viruses on Earth are deadly, just imagine what bacteria from other planets could do to us. Second, Mars has almost no magnetic field, so even if we could (re-)establish a thick atmosphere, how would we preserve it over vast periods of time and not have it stripped of by solar winds? Then there is the problem with the soil of Mars: There are experiments that suggest we could actually grow fruits and plants for food up there, albeit not as efficiently as on Earth. But would the soil contaminate the fruits and plants with metals and other toxins to such an extent it would be deadly to eat it? Food for thought, huh? This comment is not a criticism of your great video, it rather inspired me to think about all the potential problems and do some further research. Thanks!
Only issue with the video is the bit about blasting the ice caps. We'd need several times the entire worldwide nuclear arms supply to do that. If it worked at all
Deliberately creating a nuclear meltdown that creates a big pond of glowing metal or something is a more reasonable interpretation of it. I suspect that releasing the energy gradually instead of with an explosion would cause it to be expended more in melting and less in making things fly off into space and huge electromagnetic pulses.
4 Light Years, so it takes 4 Years for the light from Alpha Centauri to Reach us. From Leap Year, to Leap Year, and I see that it's a Binary Star with Proxima Centauri.
Wouldnt any atmosphere we created just fade away? The whole reason Mars doesnt have much atmosphere right now is the lack of magnetic field, causing what atmosphere existed previously to be dispersed by solar winds
@@ProfessorDaveExplains that'd be pretty rad. We'll probably have to start in space stations, and then try to branch out as technology develops. Even habitable stations on Mars would be incredible
This is ok...but when colonizing space, planets and moons its seems like people are forgetting that the Earth is in the habitable zone...planets past Mars and moons are not in the habitable zone...so even if they can have magnet spheres made, they will be very distant from the Sun...its hard to terraform a planet or moon that has 1/20th the amount of radiation the Earth has( plants have to have sunlight)...
but there are other ways to heat a planet, like the tidal influence of a large planet. there are moons of jupiter and saturn that have liquid water or volcanic activity
My biggest concern for colonization would be generational, kids born and raised on Mars wouldn't be able to visit Earth due to lower bone and muscle density. While Earthborn humans could go to Mars with very little issue. Without artificial gravity, space kids would be even worse off.
If I ever became US President, one of my main focuses would be to build a new interest in space. Trying to make colonies and other focuses that will help mankind make it to the stars for our future.
What do you think about going to Mars before it is terraformed? Windows are almost impossible due to radiation. And astronauts would have to live underground to combat radiation. The mars dust is also toxic. And solar panels will not give enough power. Mars is extremely cold and has a thinner atmosphere. Mars seems like a logical step but also an extremely hard task to live in almost the worst place imaginable.
With that much energy we could build another sphere on top of it and live on that instead. We would spin that fast enough to over come the gravity of the sun and simulate 10m/s2 acceleration.
Is there a reason we shouldn't also terraform Venus? We would have to cool it and modify the atmosphere, but that could be achieved with bacteria and seems about as challenging as the Mars route. What am I missing in there? Forget it. I just finished watching your episode on Venus. It'd make for a long day for a few reasons. I could see how terraforming it could be a little more involved then Mars.
Mars core has cooled and stopped spinning. So there is no magnet field to protect the planet like earth has. Any gases released by the ice caps would be blasted away by the solar winds. Getting Mars habitable would take far more than melting the ice caps.
This is where our focus should be. We can do this. I am 100% sure of it. I know I’m not the only one, and much more intelligent people than me are thinking the same thing. To go out and colonise space is clearly our only path forward. I also know that we will make war on whoever we meet. It is our only way.
Am still 13 I would be glad to see colonized Mars like it would be cool and awesome to see! I’m always so interested in the galaxies and space like it’s huge and I would wish to one day go there too
Question? how strong is Mars' Magnetic field? because all that terraforming and man made green house effect would be a waste of time if Mars has a weak magnetic field to retain the atmosphere?
Pretty sure you'd need to strip the entire contents of about 200 solar systems in order to get the material to make a Dyson sphere. And then everyone inside would be subjected to rather colossal levels of radiation. Also, any coronal mass ejection would kill billions of people... As far as Mars, the real problem with walking around on the surface is that we'd need several trillion square kilometers of solar mirror to liquify it and then drop several quadrillion tons of rocks onto the melted surface in order to give it a liquid core to generate a magnetic field. The extra mass will also help Mars keep ahold of the relevant gasses.
Numberjack Fiutro If you terraform the moons, you’d end up killing the life that is there if there is life since they are living with that specific climate and atmosphere and all.
@@liamwilliams5711 We do not know if there is life there yet. There is evidence under the surface of some of the terraformable moons, there are conditions similar to those when we believe life formed on earth. But I would say it is far from confirmed just yet.
Installation 00 is the librarian's ark, the halos themselves are labeled installation 01 to 07 ~ a guy who has read too many halo books for his own good.
Venusian colonization is possible, about 70 km above the surface there’s an atmospheric pressure similar to earths with a temperature slightly higher than earths. The Venusian atmosphere is much denser than Earth’s atmosphere so we can potentially make blimp cities using just earth air, and due to the density differentiation, leaks would take days to be dangerous for theoretical models of colonies. Let’s go Venus!!!
that's it i'm going back to titan , so the avengers movie was correct about harnessing the power of a star. Dose that mean we can just use dark matter as a fuel source?
Which is due to the lack of a magnetosphere and is why there is no and will never be an atmosphere until that problem is resolved. Which we can not do as of yet.
If we terraformed mars, I wonder how long it would take for martian humans and earth humans to war against eachother. Also, I'm interested how human children would physically develop with lower gravity. Would they be weirdly taller? No differences at all?
@@numberjackfiutro7412 Could you describe the mechanisms to achieve that in more detail? I could also argue the way to terraform Jupiter is to 'make it more earth-like'.
Ethics of terra forming other worlds? I don't think this is a decision that the scientific class get to make on their own. If the life already there is simple or even just bacterial, I don't see why progress would be halted.
Real problem is even the biggest Jovian moon is imposible to terraform, at least on the surface. They don't have enough mass like planets and they get sooooo little sunlight so energy is a problem ON THE SURFACE. But the great thing abouth this moons are they are geting heates up by their gas giants not by light emision but by tidal forces and not on surface but inside. So even if they don't have enough mass to keep enough gas and enough sunlight to get energy, they have the crust to keep gases and liquid inside safe and tital forces for energy so we can't terraform them but still colonize! Europa is the moon that we have the biggest hopes and Ganymede might be too but its internal ocean is waay deeper than Europa's ocean. Titan is a nice place but just like Venus it suffers from temputure issues and has enough gas to suck all the heat from our colonies (Venus is opposite and it can heat up our colony because it has gas). So yeah it is possible to have perminant colonies in this moons but it will be much different than what we have here so it will require much better technology so they are long term future goals. Also all the moons except Titan and Callisto has a ridiclus amouth of radiation on their surfaces so we have no chance but went inside.
If the Dyson sphere were solid, its own gravity would collapse it into many much tinier objects. If it were strong enough to resist that, the sun would drift within it. Mean gravity inside a symmetrical sphere is zero, the proof of which I think goes back to Newton.
the planet mercury and the asteroids that fly around can be used to build one. I've seen a planet be gutted for its resources so if they could do it, I'm sure you humans can to.
We'd do better if next, we made straight for NEOs with probes, and after finding a good one, mining it either by dragging it back to HEO or packages of refined stuff from it sent back. Nothing else offers to pay off a space investment and all the other things we want to do in space. Mars is not a suitable place to live because of low gravity. First somebody needs to prove that we could live there long term and stay healthy, but even then, O'Neill habitats are a better or the only option for long-term large-scale habitation. The idea of terraforming Mars is silly and misguided. O'Neill habs built of asteroid and small moon resources allow for the equivalent of hundreds of times the living area we have on Earth. Note that terraforming Mars adds only 25% to what we have -if it works
The Martian atmosphere is already like 95 percent carbon dioxide, so I don't think freeing up more of it is going to do any good as far as raising the temperature. You would need to drastically increase the atmospheric pressure... somehow! Also, Mars does not have enough gravity to hold onto an Earthlike atmosphere, even if we could somehow give it one... and that's not even factoring in the lack of a magnetosphere. I'm skeptical that terraforming is possible, and NASA astrobiologist Chris McKay describes it as being at best a tens of thousands of years proposition. More likely, our colonization of space will be more about us adapting to our new environment rather than the other way around: self contained habitats (likely underground) and orbital colonies, that sort of thing.
Of course it would. The atmosphere may be almost all CO2, but it's unbelievably thin, around 1% as thick as ours. More gas, stronger greenhouse effect, the planet heats up. That's indisputable. Also, more gas, greater atmospheric pressure. Certainly the gravity is there, but as you say, the challenge is the lack of magnetic field. I'm not sure how we would prevent the atmosphere from getting stripped away again without one. And I agree, definitely habitats will come first, and will likely be no problem, terraforming may be a pipedream, but it is scientifically quite sound, even if it would be difficult to pull off. Maybe one day we can do it.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains www.nature.com/articles/s41550-018-0529-6 Unfortunately, it looks like there is nowhere near enough carbon dioxide in Mars' polar caps or other expected deposits to produce an appreciable increase in greenhouse effect. Maybe there's 1 to 5 percent of what we'd need to reach Earthlike levels. Maybe. But even if you could somehow import an atmosphere, the gravity is still a problem. As I'm sure you know, the escape velocity of gases changes with temperature. And once you raise the temperature of Mars to Earthlike levels, it no longer has enough gravity to hold onto water vapor or oxygen. Counterintuitively, you would actually end up losing your atmosphere, or at least all of it except the carbon dioxide and xenon. I guess maybe you could farm there and live in enclosed habitats, but you would not have a breathable atmosphere (unless you genetically modified yourself).
I'm not one of those people that don't believe we didn't go to the moon but I definitely am extremely curious why NASA would destroy(or lose) the technology used to achieve that & another curiosity is why do some scientists say that humans can't penetrate the Van Allen radiation belts? Those 2 things really puzzle the issue.
@Shi Yu Meng Dude... i gotta tell you something... we went to the moon several different times, and landed on it several times. If you think that The apollo program was just one mission to the moon, you gotta learn basic deduction. Also, China's space program has sent a probe to the moon, with videos and photos so if you don't trust NASA you can check them out. So, in all fairness "NASA is the only organisation to make the claim to send humans to the moon." is an inaccurate statement. Hope this helps.
Also Thomas, I'm not sure which scientist you have listened to, but i'm pretty sure they were wrong about the Van Allen radiation belts. As sufficient if non-windowed space crafts have been proven to pass the Van Allen radiation belts.
@Shi Yu Meng Dude, The apollo program had many missions, that's why they call it a program. How is it a strawman? When i said we, i meant it as most of the big nations have launched something to orbit/land on the moon. You know this, but you don't care. Just because people have the same religion, doesn't mean they live in harmony, they have fights, and in extreme cases, "wars." (Like for god sakes THEY WENT TO WAR WITH EACH OTHER) Also, god religion? Really, like that narrows it down, theres like two million gods CURRENTLY, not counting for the ones tens of thousands of years ago.
@Shi Yu Meng in your original comment, you said that science requires repeatability. The apollo program repeated going to the moon 5-6 times. You act like the governments are so secure and safe from spreading these "truths." Yet you never see us claiming you're in cahoots with the muslims. If you can't test gravity then it's not my problem you have no idea how scientific classification works. You act like it's a progression line, going from theory to law. But it's more like a tree, where theory and law diverge from hypothesis, that itself comes from observation.
@Shi Yu Meng also, comparing a man walking on water to a feat which required math, prediction, time, engineering and pressure upon those who decided to be explorers rather than lazy pebbles like you online making conspiracy theories because you want to feel special
I think a Dyson swarm is the best way to combat global warming while increasing energy needs significantly. It would take a MASSIVE number of satellite panels to achieve this, but think of the energy we can potentially collect from these
Would be awesome but with an inert core and minimal magnetosphere the sun would just blow the atmosphere off into space. Existing lava tubes and subterranean cave systems probably simpler starting point.
Hey professor Dave thank you for helping me through chemistry my senior year of high school two years ago
This was probably a fun episode for you to make, Dave :)
you know it!
I like the fact that you used what is most likely the TRUE quote : « That’s one small step for A man », not « one small step for MAN » like many think it is.
I’m curious how space colonies would look like considering that countries would be settling there, not the United planet earth. I’m guessing the first colonies will be by private companies, eventually being either subdivided or federalized.
Either what you wrote, or a united group of companies/countries that eventually factions into separate groups, independent of any country on earth (once Mars becomes self sustainable and independent from earth).
We would need to establish a world government before we get to that point. I wouldn't hold my breath on that in our lifetime. This video simulates hundreds or thousands yesr into the future
Depends! With we are talking about in colonies on the moon and mars then yes you maybe right! But if we were to travel from beyond our solar sistem to another star like alpha centauri we would be a different species like carl sagan said
That's similar to what happens in the Ender's Game series. Many planets seem to be settled by a particular demographic, sort of how a demographic left Europe to settle in America. I distinctly remember Ender living for a time on a planet based on Norse culture.
god I hope space colonies don't turn into some type of neo feudal capitalist hell hole
I find Dyson Spheres super interesting. But the question I had: Any material that close to a star... wouldn't it just melt or evaporate? And how would we get it "around" the star without burning ourselves?
A Dyson Sphere would be impractical. Better to go with a Dyson Swarm.
Lots of rad resistance and tough materials
No no no, a Dyson sphere would have about the same distance from the sun like the earth, so no problem with heat.
Here's a question regarding travel. Suppose there was a way to get a ship or other Cosmic vessel to have a initial burst of speed we're talking hundreds of miles per hour maybe or even thousands. Now in space there's nothing to slow you down so perhaps one quick burst of power and then "float" at high speed into thr direction of the destination, of course taking into account things in the way like asteroids and other planets. I would compare this idea to speeding down a highway and then throwing the car in neutral to coast for a while. Would that work?
Yes,, there is no friction in space whereas in your car,, you can speed up and put the transmission in neutral and you WILL "coast" for a moment,, but the friction of the tires and the air will slow your car to a stop pretty quickly... but you are still right about coasting in space,, you accelerate and then turn off the rocket or whatever and you'll keep moving until your ship hits something or fall into the gravity well of a star planet moon or whatever...
I’d love to go once it’s safe or safer. I build car and food factory’s for a living. I also build water treatment plants also wind, gas and steam turbines.
The first guy to be in a vacuum chamber in a space suit ( respect ) started coughing blood and passed out in 30 seconds.
The emergency team got in there 2 minutes ( i think 5 minutes was considered brain damage ) .
I kind of helped my dad with cars since i was a teenager ( i was the gopher... ) and its crazy what keeps them together. And we know what the space station is made out of 😕 .
@@asahmosskmf4639 not a very good space suit eh
2:17 Examination of all the reservoirs of CO2 indicates there's not enough to warm the planet above the freezing point of water. The current pressure is 6 millibars. One millibar of CO2 would bring Mars to 0C. Somehow freeing all the CO2 locked up in rocks and ice would bring the atmosphere to around 20 millibars, as an optimistic estimate.
Source: "Inventory of CO2 available for terraforming Mars" Nature Astronomy (2018)
Yeah I like Dave's enthusiasm but sometimes he kinda screws the pooch lol... Okay so there's Frozen carbon dioxide and water on Mars, but consider that if all the atmosphere of Earth were to chill out and fall to Earth as snow, it would result in a layer of Frozen nitrogen and oxygen 10 meters thick... So if there was a glacier the size of Texas and a mile thick at the polar caps of mars, then there would be enough carbon dioxide to definitely raise the temperature however there would still be no oxygen or nitrogen... Add to that the fact that there is not enough water to form a cloud above Mars let alone cause rain,, and add to that the fact that there is no appreciable magnetic field and therefore radiation shielding would be necessary AND any developing atmosphere would be blown away by solar wind...
This is mere technological evolution. Psychologically we are still colonisers and looking to expand our empires. Is this what life should be about?
Excellent question. I'm for visiting space, but not colonizing it.
sir i have a question, the earths gravity hold down the atmosphere, still alot of air get in the space.
although mars got less gravity, how it will hold its atmosphere ? isn't its atmosphere will lose in space very quick ?
yes, in fact mars' atmosphere is about 1% as thick as earth's
@@ProfessorDaveExplains sir but if we transform the Mars in far future, its atmosphere will be lost in space too quickly, does mars can create more and more air to hold its atmosphere ? sorry i can't explain my question.
No it's a valid point, the solar wind would strip away any atmosphere we try to install on Mars, so we would probably have to go so far as figuring out how to produce a magnetic field for the planet. Who knows if that's possible!
@@ProfessorDaveExplains thank you sir alot, that makes sense now. lots of love from Pakistan.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains an artificial magnetic field and/or artificial gravity that is set on 9.8 m/s^2
I've always thought the Kardashev scale was fundamentally megalomaniacal.
4:38 "a bonus with some new friends to be play with" made me chuckled 😂
Great video and I just found your channel. I have a question about terraforming a planet like Mars. If we were able to melt the ice on mars, decontaminate the soil, control the CO2 levels and create an atmosphere, would it then hold up to solar winds and storms as Mars doesn't have a global magnetic field like earth for protection? Basically, if we did all the work needed to make it livable would the planet itself be able to hold it? Then again, humans can always find some way to figure that out. Excellent video and cool channel, I'm glad I found it, thanks.
Very good question! The bit about the lack of magnetic field is certainly concerning. But every problem has a solution, so let's get started!
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Mars Express detected them in the southern poles and MAVIN detected auroras as well using its IUVS. So it has some magnetic activity, just not like here on earth. Since the change and loss in its atmosphere occurred because of the loss of its magnetic field do to the cooling of its core, it might be like trying to light a candle in a wind storm. Do you know of anything in that regards had been looked at yet? I'm an idiot when it comes to this stuff, but I do find terraforming and Dyson spheres to be amazing subjects. This is a neat article I did find on the subject. www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/V2050/pdf/8250.pdf Now, if we had an Enterprise...
Thanks for replying and again, great channel, keep up the great work.
The main issue is that mars doesn't have enough water or CO2 for a 1 bar atmosphere, it has some but not enough. The main issues are that in mars' lighter gravity you need more air for that 1 bar because there is less force that pushes that air down to the planet. Additionally you can't really breathe CO2 and a pure oxygen atmosphere is also dangerous. This means you need an inert gas like nitrogen or helium. The problem with that is there's no helium or nitrogen on mars. Good news is that helium nitrogen, and water are fairly common throughout the solar system so you can truck that stuff in from the kuiper belt. The magnetic field problem is easily fixed with a floating magnet.
Dreams on!
5:55 Maybe we can do this with a stellar engine, instead of going to different solar systems alone we can take our solar system with us.
This helped me get passed a migraine, thank you. Your show would make a awesome cartoon.
Awesome explanation
Isaac Arthur does a whole series on this stuff.
Just use Solar sails. Focus enough of the Sun’s light into a narrow beam to give your ship a push towards the next star system. You’ll get there in a few decades.
yep i've seen his stuff! it's very cool.
Kinda makes me want to go back to school.
...just use Solar sails? Light is a very very very *very* bad propulsion method.
And yeah, Isaac Arthur is off some orders of magnitude in this matter.
@@hanneshuober9275 yes, but actually no. The fastest manmade objetct is a solar sail, so it actually works. The Problem is, that with acceleration, mass and g-forces rise, and life on a Shuttle like this would need a lot of live-stabilizing systems.
The thing is tho is that our solar system gives us everything for colonization of planets within our system and resources to build a Dyson swarm. we just have to harvest mercury to start the swarm and Venus has the necessary gases for colonization.
How can you make a video covering terraformimg Mars without mentioning the lack of a magnetosphere? Any artificially created atmosphere would be blown away by solar radiation.
dude humanity is still debating about whether or not climate change even exists, i think we're in a tough spot to be thinking about moving planets.
I mean only absolutely braindead chuds still deny climate change.
@@gwynbleidd1917Yeah but the only "solutions" coming from most people still include the biggest non-sustainable aspects of modern civilization,, like cars........ Of course it's nice to be able to haul around a ton or two of steel etc to be able to protect you from your own fear of other people,, and the convenience of being able to travel at a mile a minute or more is really cool but unless we're going to make one of these things for every person who wants one, there's always going to be the haves and Have nots and civilization doesn't do very well with that sort of structure.... also with the vehicle transportation matrix,, as much space is devoted in the typical urban area to cars as there is to people, which is a really stupid way of doing things because people become so lazy and also so entitled that an urban area pretty quickly becomes an anxiety zoo with stupendous resources being poured into projects that save people a couple of minutes... it's insane and the anxiety produced makes people want to spread out even more which produces suburban sprawl which is destroying ecosystems all over the planet...
This video is good for getting ppl into this biz :) the more the better!
once our civilization reaches 1 on the Cardashev scale from 0,75 that we are now and witness the extinction of flat earthers, then we'll be able to colonize other planets.
As soon as 5G satellite networks make internet/signal available and better in remote Earth places, as well as densely populated cities- we should start seeing a massive increase/shift in overall human mass consciousness, enabling more organised/synchronised work in a more focused manner towards improvement and creation of new technology, space travel and other STEM fields.
@@oliverschubert8242 We have people that think 5G is spreading the coronavirus, going so far to attacking cell towers. Makes me sad.
@@MrMichealHouse and that's a good thing cuz if they attack you get arrested and sent to jail. Because Norwegian the fake a chip put inside of them. Will get the addicted to watching movies
@@saberiandream316 most of the time I expect us to just advanced so far beyond them that they become the poor people and the rest of the planet becomes rich
@@Nine-Signs yeah I'm just say this humanity doesn't kill itself this century. we have to paxico the World War 3 in 2156. Or in the humanities a trillion
These kind of videos make me not loss the hope in humanity thanks keep posting pls
We're a good species at heart, and are destined to go out into the universe and answer the great questions we all ask (Why are we here? What is this?).
Love humanity
8:03 love that detail of mercury being mined there
Ive seen a lot of Your video, Idk how i havent stumbled upon this gem.
By this simplified definition we might very well skip type 1 altogether.
There is very little reason to harness all the Suns energy that lands on Earth when you have a cheaper and better source available (namely nuclear).
On the other hand for a habitat in the Dyson swarm of type 2 civ it makes perfect sense to use mirrors and harness the solar power because out there that method is the simplest thing to do.
no, because the sun itself is a nuclear fusion reactor.
we are not skippping type 1 when harnessing fusion energy, because it's still just the planets' ressources.
@@kaantax8666 Well that would make no sense though ... You could use up all of Earths hydrogen and far exceed a type 2 civilisation if you did it quickly enough.
So the division between type 1 and type 2 is meaningless when you don't know which is higher up
For detonating the ice caps on Mars, wouldn't there be issues with the new atmosphere being stripped away from the planet by solar wind, similar to what happened earlier? What could be done to prevent that from happening again?
Yes for sure, we would probably have to figure out a way to install an internal magnetic field or implement some other artificial measure from orbit.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains So, do you think you humans would be able to heat up mar's core once again to reignite the magnetic field or would that be an impossible task?
Now I'm a star so my knowledge on planets isn't perfect so this question my not account for everything.
I mean I have no clue how we would do it, but I don't think it's outside the realm of physical possibility.
There is a reason for the low atmospheric pressure on Mars: the lower gravity forces.
The created oxigen and water vapour might disappeare in space as well.
"And killing a whole planet on is a lot for anyone's conscience to bear."
Meanwhile, here on Earth:
Dyson Spheres are inherent anachronisms, because any civilization with sufficient resources to build one would have already overcome the problems the sphere itself is supposed to solve. Hence there would be no reason to pursue it. A person with a healthy scientific imagination could more rightly expect that higher levels of technology would allow for other more efficient and effective ways to harness energy at that scale.
Setting aside things like cosmic radiation and non solar bodies entering the system, is there enough matter in the solar system to make even a ring around Sol?
If the width of the ring matched the diameter of the earth what would be the gravitational effect on the mass in any given Earth sized area and how would it maintain its plane?
What would keep the matter from wanting to collapse back into a sphere?
I know I went far into the theoretical on this but I really do want to know if there is even enough matter in the system to attempt a ring let alone a Dyson's Sphere.
If we lived on the interior of a Dyson sphere, we would be in zero g, and might drift away from the surface. The net gravity inside a symmetrical sphere is zero.
the dyson sphere wouldn't be that huge, an early dyson sphere will be swarms of tiny wide objects orbiting the sun.
Think of Dyson spheres as a massive veil of solar panels enveloping most of the sun (from a safe distance, of course). A solar panel doesn't need to be more than a few mm thick (2-4mm).
We need Dyson spheres for harvest the energy of the sun, not necessarily to live in them. We can still live in O'neill cylinders distributed along the Dyson sphere veil. You can picture the Dyson sphere as a sea, and O'neill cylinders as equidistant islands were we would live.
This is really cool. I think you may have made a mistake with Kardeshev scale. There is no definition for a type 0 civilization...
I think the simplest reason why is because anything before a type 1 is not truly civilized yet.
That's not true, humans have civilization.
the best advice I have for you humans is try to find a red dwarf star with a planet in the habitable zone as red dwarf stars can fuse for trillions of years.
and it will make the star happy as they will have a world with life on it, so they aren't completely alone once all the other stars die.
Holy shit!? I’m still new to following this professor. First I see him hilariously debunk that criminal hovind guy now seeing this! These ideas of future technologies is amazing and already seems it’s possible to do! At the age of 35 I hope we do atleast a quarter of that before I die! Great work Dave! Keep up the hard work for reality and moves us forward as a species
Awesome 😍😍😍
Keep doing what you are doing i imaging one day you will be in a position to buy one of these space tour tickets
Dude you know how big the sun is? No chance in hell we would have any amount of material at any point to build anything around that even 1 ring would be impossible
Love this video. Not sure how old it is but I wonder if you’ve developed the more agreed upon process/sun energy harvester, which is the Dyson Swarm that you stated but didn’t go in any detail onC which is similar but so much different than the Dyson sphere. the Dyson sphere Would be exponentially more susceptible to failure and it would take too much energy in time for it to be very logical to build. A Dyson sphere would be one massive structure, which could be disastrous if a comet or something crashed into it, even very likely destroying it all. It might not be functional until the entire thing is built and finished, which would take a crazy long time, although I’m sure they would figure out how to use part of it at a time as it is built piece by piece... but that’s why the Dyson swarm is just likely so much better. You could build each small satellite and launch it into orbit and already having it working very very quickly in relation to the giant sphere structure, and then that first small one would immediately be sending energy back to the place the rest are being built, giving the energy required to keep building more and more, and the more and more built and launched as quick as possible, the more energy sent back to build more. The logic would be to create a base on mercury as fully automated as possible run by as few humans as needed. The low gravity and close proximity mercury is to the sun would make it that much easier to launch each new unit and get it into place quickly. Then if a rock or comet crashes into the swarm, it might only hit one of them, or just a few, and the rest would be fine instead of the entire structure of the sphere breaking, and even breaking completely. While the sphere would need a ton of energy and time to produce even the first parts of it, the hardest part of building the swarm would be the initial construction of the base factory, as soon as that very first part is built, you can get one unit into position at a time as quick as possible, and keep constructing more and more of the base to keep pumping out more and more faster and faster with each launched sending more and more energy that is required to create more and more. You wouldn’t need to spend anywhere nearly as much on protection because losing one or two wouldn’t mean much at all, while you would need massive protection of the sphere to prevent its total destruction from even just one large meteor or comet or something. Then even if you feel like the swarm is “finished” well, you could keep adding another layer to it, as there would be gaps between each unit, also, you wouldn’t have the problem a sphere would have with our sun, a partial sphere might be okay but still even might take away from sunlight and energy getting to the earth (might help with climate change though lol) but the fuller the sphere the more we take away light and energy from our home planet earth. With a Dyson swarm you could program the orbit of each and every individual unit to avoid the exact place they need to so that the same sunlight and energy still shines onto earth as normal. Anyway, love your videos, hope my comment wasn’t a bore, just love the topic and figured I’d blab about it!
Your knowledge is truly earthshattering. Wow. I'm clapping so hard.
Spoiler: Moonfall actually explores the concept of Dyson spheres and it’s such a good movie. I love it so much. So much fun. Especially since all the info is coming from a conspiracy theorist, but I’m pretty sure I remember even he finds the flat earth theory ridiculous when it’s brought up somewhere in the movie. So fun and interesting.
Thank you for these wonderful vids
Is the Mars gravitational field/pull strong enough to hold and maintain an oxygen holding atmosphere over time though? Radiation reaching the surface of Mars, from the sun, is also greater due to its limited ozone layer. If Mars is able to build an ozone layer over time, without being destroyed by continual radiation storms is another question.... Sticking with capsules and underground tunnelling for now :)
Mars isn't large enough to permanently hold oxygen, but it could hold it for millions of years.
As thrilling as terraforming Mars may sound, we must consider many factors.
First of all we must take into account interplanetary contamination: If there is life on Mars in the form of microscopic cells or in whatever shape of form, we may end up killing it, or it might end up killing us. If you think bacteria and viruses on Earth are deadly, just imagine what bacteria from other planets could do to us.
Second, Mars has almost no magnetic field, so even if we could (re-)establish a thick atmosphere, how would we preserve it over vast periods of time and not have it stripped of by solar winds?
Then there is the problem with the soil of Mars: There are experiments that suggest we could actually grow fruits and plants for food up there, albeit not as efficiently as on Earth. But would the soil contaminate the fruits and plants with metals and other toxins to such an extent it would be deadly to eat it?
Food for thought, huh?
This comment is not a criticism of your great video, it rather inspired me to think about all the potential problems and do some further research. Thanks!
Microbes from other planets probably couldn't infect us; their biochemistry would be too different.
Only issue with the video is the bit about blasting the ice caps. We'd need several times the entire worldwide nuclear arms supply to do that. If it worked at all
Deliberately creating a nuclear meltdown that creates a big pond of glowing metal or something is a more reasonable interpretation of it. I suspect that releasing the energy gradually instead of with an explosion would cause it to be expended more in melting and less in making things fly off into space and huge electromagnetic pulses.
A few 10 gigawatt fusion reactors powering plasma arc heating elements also comes to mind.
4 Light Years, so it takes 4 Years for the light from Alpha Centauri to Reach us. From Leap Year, to Leap Year, and I see that it's a Binary Star with Proxima Centauri.
When humanity doesn't change first, colonization of inhabited worlds would always lead in terror, as it happened here on earth so many times.
Wouldnt any atmosphere we created just fade away? The whole reason Mars doesnt have much atmosphere right now is the lack of magnetic field, causing what atmosphere existed previously to be dispersed by solar winds
It's possible we would have to install a magnetic field, if that is even feasible.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains that'd be pretty rad. We'll probably have to start in space stations, and then try to branch out as technology develops. Even habitable stations on Mars would be incredible
This is ok...but when colonizing space, planets and moons its seems like people are forgetting that the Earth is in the habitable zone...planets past Mars and moons are not in the habitable zone...so even if they can have magnet spheres made, they will be very distant from the Sun...its hard to terraform a planet or moon that has 1/20th the amount of radiation the Earth has( plants have to have sunlight)...
but there are other ways to heat a planet, like the tidal influence of a large planet. there are moons of jupiter and saturn that have liquid water or volcanic activity
My biggest concern for colonization would be generational, kids born and raised on Mars wouldn't be able to visit Earth due to lower bone and muscle density. While Earthborn humans could go to Mars with very little issue. Without artificial gravity, space kids would be even worse off.
If I ever became US President, one of my main focuses would be to build a new interest in space. Trying to make colonies and other focuses that will help mankind make it to the stars for our future.
What do you think about going to Mars before it is terraformed? Windows are almost impossible due to radiation. And astronauts would have to live underground to combat radiation. The mars dust is also toxic. And solar panels will not give enough power. Mars is extremely cold and has a thinner atmosphere. Mars seems like a logical step but also an extremely hard task to live in almost the worst place imaginable.
If we were to live in the Dyson sphere everyone would be 4 feet tall lol
With that much energy we could build another sphere on top of it and live on that instead. We would spin that fast enough to over come the gravity of the sun and simulate 10m/s2 acceleration.
sniperammow true, though by that time artificial gravity should already be invented, like gravitons would be like how we use photons
Is there a reason we shouldn't also terraform Venus? We would have to cool it and modify the atmosphere, but that could be achieved with bacteria and seems about as challenging as the Mars route. What am I missing in there?
Forget it. I just finished watching your episode on Venus. It'd make for a long day for a few reasons. I could see how terraforming it could be a little more involved then Mars.
Mars core has cooled and stopped spinning. So there is no magnet field to protect the planet like earth has. Any gases released by the ice caps would be blasted away by the solar winds. Getting Mars habitable would take far more than melting the ice caps.
This is where our focus should be. We can do this. I am 100% sure of it. I know I’m not the only one, and much more intelligent people than me are thinking the same thing.
To go out and colonise space is clearly our only path forward. I also know that we will make war on whoever we meet. It is our only way.
5:21 Space Fudge!🤤
Am still 13 I would be glad to see colonized Mars like it would be cool and awesome to see! I’m always so interested in the galaxies and space like it’s huge and I would wish to one day go there too
You will likely see we going too mars, since this is very close, like in 5 years or so
@@caiooliveira4964 Mars 2024
Doesn't make any sense to go to Mars if we cannot guarantee a base on the Moon.
Question? how strong is Mars' Magnetic field? because all that terraforming and man made green house effect would be a waste of time if Mars has a weak magnetic field to retain the atmosphere?
Yeah we would probably have to figure out a way to install a magnetic field.
How about inter planetary foot ball match. Earthain against marsin 😵😵😵
Pretty sure you'd need to strip the entire contents of about 200 solar systems in order to get the material to make a Dyson sphere. And then everyone inside would be subjected to rather colossal levels of radiation. Also, any coronal mass ejection would kill billions of people...
As far as Mars, the real problem with walking around on the surface is that we'd need several trillion square kilometers of solar mirror to liquify it and then drop several quadrillion tons of rocks onto the melted surface in order to give it a liquid core to generate a magnetic field. The extra mass will also help Mars keep ahold of the relevant gasses.
I don't think we have what it takes to work together on this scale, though I truly hope I'm wrong.
@klegthak
This pandemic would have been a wonderful chance for us all to try and work together toward a common goal. . . sadly, we human-ed it all up.
4:45 - Sure we'd be able to terraform those moons.
Numberjack Fiutro If you terraform the moons, you’d end up killing the life that is there if there is life since they are living with that specific climate and atmosphere and all.
@@liamwilliams5711 We do not know if there is life there yet. There is evidence under the surface of some of the terraformable moons, there are conditions similar to those when we believe life formed on earth. But I would say it is far from confirmed just yet.
7:35
that looks like a lot of installations 00 joined together
Installation 00 is the librarian's ark, the halos themselves are labeled installation 01 to 07
~ a guy who has read too many halo books for his own good.
i was not talking about the halos cause those dont look like one
@@desangrador5770 soo what were talking about, cause they don't look like the ark either? We are talking about the HALO game franchise right?
10 million years later:
Select server:
Andromeda galaxy
> Milky Way galaxy
Triangulum Galaxy
NGC 3109 galaxy
Venusian colonization is possible, about 70 km above the surface there’s an atmospheric pressure similar to earths with a temperature slightly higher than earths. The Venusian atmosphere is much denser than Earth’s atmosphere so we can potentially make blimp cities using just earth air, and due to the density differentiation, leaks would take days to be dangerous for theoretical models of colonies. Let’s go Venus!!!
that's it i'm going back to titan , so the avengers movie was correct about harnessing the power of a star. Dose that mean we can just use dark matter as a fuel source?
That intro 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 so funny!!
3:09 umm aware that the magnetic feild is not as strong as earth
"Terraforming"
Spore players: *Let us introduce ourselves.*
"asteroid mining"
Elite Dangerous players, Star Citizen players, No Man's Sky players: *Let us introduce ourselves.*
Mars advocates keep forgetting the radiation.
Which is due to the lack of a magnetosphere and is why there is no and will never be an atmosphere until that problem is resolved. Which we can not do as of yet.
Does Tabbies Star have a Dyson Sphere around it?
Probably not. The thinking now is we're seeing swarms of comets, or planet-forming material.
What about the issue of funding?
If you can't make the environment suit the human,
Make the human suit the environment.
Just imagine how much energy we'd have to use if we could harness the full power of the sun
We're fucked
I feel like you'd get along well with Kurzgesagt.
If we terraformed mars, I wonder how long it would take for martian humans and earth humans to war against eachother.
Also, I'm interested how human children would physically develop with lower gravity. Would they be weirdly taller? No differences at all?
Fhloston Paradise crept into my mind...
1) How will the atmosphere be retained? Mars has no magnetic field like Earth. 2) You can't grow plants in Martian soil due to perchlorates.
The rumor is that Elon Musk has some magic beans.
An artificial magnetic field could be made. Martian dirt could be made suitable for growing plants in.
@@numberjackfiutro7412 Could you describe the mechanisms to achieve that in more detail? I could also argue the way to terraform Jupiter is to 'make it more earth-like'.
Ethics of terra forming other worlds? I don't think this is a decision that the scientific class get to make on their own. If the life already there is simple or even just bacterial, I don't see why progress would be halted.
Real problem is even the biggest Jovian moon is imposible to terraform, at least on the surface. They don't have enough mass like planets and they get sooooo little sunlight so energy is a problem ON THE SURFACE. But the great thing abouth this moons are they are geting heates up by their gas giants not by light emision but by tidal forces and not on surface but inside. So even if they don't have enough mass to keep enough gas and enough sunlight to get energy, they have the crust to keep gases and liquid inside safe and tital forces for energy so we can't terraform them but still colonize! Europa is the moon that we have the biggest hopes and Ganymede might be too but its internal ocean is waay deeper than Europa's ocean. Titan is a nice place but just like Venus it suffers from temputure issues and has enough gas to suck all the heat from our colonies (Venus is opposite and it can heat up our colony because it has gas). So yeah it is possible to have perminant colonies in this moons but it will be much different than what we have here so it will require much better technology so they are long term future goals. Also all the moons except Titan and Callisto has a ridiclus amouth of radiation on their surfaces so we have no chance but went inside.
professor ow to go out of solar system
Anew video please????????????
check out my tutorial on the future of space travel
@@ProfessorDaveExplains i have long been trying to contact you were do you live
first time u replied i am very happy
i couldnt contact you in gmail
i have seen this channel grow from 25K to 350K
@@ProfessorDaveExplains hi sir please can i ave your contact no.
If the Dyson sphere were solid, its own gravity would collapse it into many much tinier objects. If it were strong enough to resist that, the sun would drift within it. Mean gravity inside a symmetrical sphere is zero, the proof of which I think goes back to Newton.
A ring of mirrors around the Sun made by Mercury is more realistic and still make SOOOO F*CKING MUCH ENERGY
I ment planet Mercury not the element
I don’t think we could get enough material for a Dyson sphere in this solar system.
the planet mercury and the asteroids that fly around can be used to build one.
I've seen a planet be gutted for its resources so if they could do it, I'm sure you humans can to.
An asteroid rangler, that'd be cool
We'd do better if next, we made straight for NEOs with probes, and after finding a good one, mining it either by dragging it back to HEO or packages of refined stuff from it sent back. Nothing else offers to pay off a space investment and all the other things we want to do in space.
Mars is not a suitable place to live because of low gravity. First somebody needs to prove that we could live there long term and stay healthy, but even then, O'Neill habitats are a better or the only option for long-term large-scale habitation.
The idea of terraforming Mars is silly and misguided.
O'Neill habs built of asteroid and small moon resources allow for the equivalent of hundreds of times the living area we have on Earth. Note that terraforming Mars adds only 25% to what we have -if it works
I was under the impression the north polar cap is all.water ice and the south cap CO2 and water.
The Martian atmosphere is already like 95 percent carbon dioxide, so I don't think freeing up more of it is going to do any good as far as raising the temperature. You would need to drastically increase the atmospheric pressure... somehow! Also, Mars does not have enough gravity to hold onto an Earthlike atmosphere, even if we could somehow give it one... and that's not even factoring in the lack of a magnetosphere. I'm skeptical that terraforming is possible, and NASA astrobiologist Chris McKay describes it as being at best a tens of thousands of years proposition. More likely, our colonization of space will be more about us adapting to our new environment rather than the other way around: self contained habitats (likely underground) and orbital colonies, that sort of thing.
Of course it would. The atmosphere may be almost all CO2, but it's unbelievably thin, around 1% as thick as ours. More gas, stronger greenhouse effect, the planet heats up. That's indisputable. Also, more gas, greater atmospheric pressure. Certainly the gravity is there, but as you say, the challenge is the lack of magnetic field. I'm not sure how we would prevent the atmosphere from getting stripped away again without one. And I agree, definitely habitats will come first, and will likely be no problem, terraforming may be a pipedream, but it is scientifically quite sound, even if it would be difficult to pull off. Maybe one day we can do it.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains www.nature.com/articles/s41550-018-0529-6 Unfortunately, it looks like there is nowhere near enough carbon dioxide in Mars' polar caps or other expected deposits to produce an appreciable increase in greenhouse effect. Maybe there's 1 to 5 percent of what we'd need to reach Earthlike levels. Maybe. But even if you could somehow import an atmosphere, the gravity is still a problem. As I'm sure you know, the escape velocity of gases changes with temperature. And once you raise the temperature of Mars to Earthlike levels, it no longer has enough gravity to hold onto water vapor or oxygen. Counterintuitively, you would actually end up losing your atmosphere, or at least all of it except the carbon dioxide and xenon. I guess maybe you could farm there and live in enclosed habitats, but you would not have a breathable atmosphere (unless you genetically modified yourself).
@@elcid2651 Thanks for bringing facts to the table instead of handwavey pseudoscience.
I was born way too early. I wish we were already an interstellar civilization. 😑
Same it sucks i wont get to see it all happen, hopefully there’s a way we can live longer or just transfer our brain to an ai
I'm not one of those people that don't believe we didn't go to the moon but I definitely am extremely curious why NASA would destroy(or lose) the technology used to achieve that & another curiosity is why do some scientists say that humans can't penetrate the Van Allen radiation belts? Those 2 things really puzzle the issue.
@Shi Yu Meng Dude... i gotta tell you something... we went to the moon several different times, and landed on it several times. If you think that The apollo program was just one mission to the moon, you gotta learn basic deduction. Also, China's space program has sent a probe to the moon, with videos and photos so if you don't trust NASA you can check them out. So, in all fairness "NASA is the only organisation to make the claim to send humans to the moon." is an inaccurate statement.
Hope this helps.
Also Thomas, I'm not sure which scientist you have listened to, but i'm pretty sure they were wrong about the Van Allen radiation belts. As sufficient if non-windowed space crafts have been proven to pass the Van Allen radiation belts.
@Shi Yu Meng Dude, The apollo program had many missions, that's why they call it a program. How is it a strawman? When i said we, i meant it as most of the big nations have launched something to orbit/land on the moon. You know this, but you don't care. Just because people have the same religion, doesn't mean they live in harmony, they have fights, and in extreme cases, "wars." (Like for god sakes THEY WENT TO WAR WITH EACH OTHER) Also, god religion? Really, like that narrows it down, theres like two million gods CURRENTLY, not counting for the ones
tens of thousands of years ago.
@Shi Yu Meng in your original comment, you said that science requires repeatability. The apollo program repeated going to the moon 5-6 times. You act like the governments are so secure and safe from spreading these "truths." Yet you never see us claiming you're in cahoots with the muslims. If you can't test gravity then it's not my problem you have no idea how scientific classification works. You act like it's a progression line, going from theory to law. But it's more like a tree, where theory and law diverge from hypothesis, that itself comes from observation.
@Shi Yu Meng also, comparing a man walking on water to a feat which required math, prediction, time, engineering and pressure upon those who decided to be explorers rather than lazy pebbles like you online making conspiracy theories because you want to feel special
I think a Dyson swarm is the best way to combat global warming while increasing energy needs significantly. It would take a MASSIVE number of satellite panels to achieve this, but think of the energy we can potentially collect from these
dyson spheres that collect all energy will require breaking a mercury
How is Mars going to hold an atmosphere with such a weak magnetosphere ?
kurzegast made a video on a dyson sphere its cool check it out
Would be awesome but with an inert core and minimal magnetosphere the sun would just blow the atmosphere off into space. Existing lava tubes and subterranean cave systems probably simpler starting point.
What about a magnetic field?
Earth should be named "mother Terra" after humanity colonizes different planets.
No even better... "Holy Terra" thx 40k
What about cloud city on Venus Dave! The planet is closer aswell!
Who is here for Mrs.Weisman's class?
Right here dood
I think you forgot about the part where Mars has no magnetic field. That is really important to stop the sun from blssting deadly rays.
this one