The reason you would get squished on Venus isn't the gravity, it's actually about .8 earth gravity...

>eventually
Ah yes, Mars losing its atmosphere completely over ten millions years will fuck over all our colonization and terraformation efforts, that's for sure.

>Saturn's rings are filled with ice.

Yeah okay let's just zip on over to Saturn and fucking harvest its rings so we can completely alter another planet's atmosphere.

I'm not questioning the science behind this, simply pointing out the sheer amount of space in space means harvesting resources from it is completely infeasible with current technology. At least for something as extreme as terraforming.

And leaving behind the absurdly laughable concept of terraforming, even with enclosed habitats Venus floating cities is a better prospect than Mars's proposed domes for a large number of reasons.

>completely infeasible with current technology
If we're talking about terraforming and colonizing planets the idea of what is and isn't feasible with current technology is completely irrelevant.

mars gravity being shit is a much larger longterm concern for a persons health then whatever hab bubble you come up with to breathe in

I know, I'm just taking the piss. I just think it's really amusing that an actual plausible solution for Venus's atmosphere problem is "harvest ice from a planet a billion kilometers away so we can hurl it into another planet"

You might be surprised to find that it's actually a far more realistic and plausible method than anything we could do to terraform Mars short of straight up magic.

are small workable platform buildings setup on a latticelike network of gas bladders to float above/in venus atmosphere so unrealistic?
i mean the grav is right, the rest is just air density and goddamn balloons

It's actually more realistic than it sounds when you consider Venus' atmospheric density. The biggest obstacle to balloon habitats is the whole acid-rain thing.

i dunno, i just tend to shy away from mars for longterm health concerns ala muscle and bone deterioration
whereas acid rain and atmospheric composition is more of a chemistry/metallurgy issue

granted if we ever figure out that scifi magic plate artificial grav i guess we can all get drunk on ceres but i digress.....

Centrifugal force. You don't need sci-fi artificial gravity plates, you just need to figure out how to make it spin fast enough.

we are talking about onplanet tho

Take Venus' excess atmosphere.
Put it on Mars' lack of atmosphere.
Both planets terraformed. EzPZ.

There's no "magic" needed. Just time. Mars has basically everything it needs for terraforming save a working magnetosphere (and there are ways around it), but nobody will see the fruits of that labor for several dozens of generations.

Martian gravity isn't the same as the microgravity space stations experience. It's low, but there's no evidence currently that it's too low for long-term human colonization, certainly not as bad as trying to colonize the moon. There's a chance it might be, but we'd need to actually spend time there to know for sure.

In either case the more practical idea would be a ring habitat above the planet instead of living on it.

>on planet
Consider this though: IN planet.

oshit
we Red Dwarves now

you can be lister ill be kryten

>There's no "magic" needed. Just time. Mars has basically everything it needs for terraforming save a working magnetosphere (and there are ways around it), but nobody will see the fruits of that labor for several dozens of generations.
And even then Venus is still the better candidate for terraforming. You basically have to turn Mars into Venus with less CO2 before you can start terraforming it. Venus is already Venus, you just need to reduce the CO2.

Colonization, not terraforming. Terraforming Venus has this big problem of days being longer than its years, which is going to kickstart the greenhouse effect again far quicker than Mars would lose any significant degree of atmosphere.

Colonizing Venus is relatively easy, easier than colonizing Mars in the short term and vastly easier than terraforming Mars. Truly terraforming Venus is going to be an even more massive undertaking.

Both of these scenarios are possible in any case, and if anything humanity of the future (provided they don't discover any native lifeforms on Mars and decide to keep it a nature preserve) should be interested in terraforming both, in addition to building up space habitats as much as possible.

...

Planets are a red hering, just build habitats in orbit.

floaty fish-bird-people flew over to Solar System and settled on Venus, giving little attention to Earth
What now?

happy campers

First interstellar mixer.
Party hard.
Convince some to play tabletop, roll for stats.
Any species that's made it this far in the galaxy isn't falling for that point buy shit.

Do not mention Androsynth.

>.8 Earth gravity
No, it's .9 g. Where did you get that number?

This. Orbital economy fuelled by the automated asteroid mining.

No gravity or atmosphere to worry about, pollution is no longer a concern, we can even mitigate the effects of low/no gravity living at the moment with exercise and medication.

*frumple*

Can I be Rimmer

only if we get a qt to be kat

Like pic related

Bravo
im gonna use this to season my beef its so spicy

This board is never better than when scientifically illiterate posters discuss science.

I knew this thread would be a winner when the OP actually assumed people thought Venus had high gravity instead of a dense atmosphere and took time to "edjukate" us.

>we can even mitigate the effects of low/no gravity living at the moment with exercise and medication
Or we can just spin the colonies and have gravity.

>Dyson Swarm
>in a thousand years
Try 10 000, minimum.

Why is Venus's atmosphere so thick/dense?

>Venus
>T H I C C

Nah, user. There's no secret to building a Dyson Swarm. It's not that advanced tech. It's just a matter of grow and industry. A thousand years is all you need.

runaway greenhouse effect
also spoopy alien oil companies, but keep that under wraps

>It's just a matter of grow and industry.
Exactly. A thousand years is not anywhere near enough. I don't think you appreciate the scale required.

let's just throw roks on Mars until it reaches the same mass as Earth.
There is a big collection right between Mars and Jupiter. All it takes is a little push.
It's probably easier than throwing ice at Venus

You understimate exponential growth. Even constant 2% growth would be enough to outnumber the stars in just 10,000.

Just nuke Mars' poles for a while

It's not going to be predictable exponential growth like that, though. The resources for that just don't exist.

Actually, if you do the math. A constant grow of 2% for over 10000 years would mean that your people outnumber the number of atoms in the observable universe.

Herrings are fucking delicious.

Active volcanism, but no carbon sinks.

>A constant grow of 2% for over 10000 years would mean that your people outnumber the number of atoms in the observable universe.

You know, every endeavor in human history have been done for one reason. Profit. Space travel haven't been done yet because it's simply not profitable. We can go out there but we need a massive investment to build a habitable place to live. Sometimes i think about how much our spacefaring technology would have improved if Mars is habitable from the get go.

>virtually infinite resource in space
>not profitable
It's not that space travel isn't profitable, it's that it's not IMMEDIATELY profitable and modern business people and investors are extremely short sighted.

Yes, there are. Planets and stars vastly outmass us. However, we can mine planets into dust and even mine the heavy metals trapped within the stars themselves. The later process is known as starlifting.

And all of that takes extremely long time, thus preventing exponential growth.

Ow are you going to speed up Venus' rotation? It rotates less then twice per orbit around the Sun.

venus sucks, mainly because there's still commie colonies from the cold war there, and remnants of lovecraftian alien tech who the greeks confused as gods
>youtube.com/watch?v=Nm7y0yweFu0

You don't, you build an orbital mirror system to regulate how much light reaches the planet.

Pfft just bring one of those fridges with an ice dispenser, tape the lever down and come back in a week

It'll also solve rising sea levels on earth!

Is not that modern businessman are shortighted, it's that the initial investment is ginormous, you can do lots of safer and more profitable things with that money, and almost nobody got the brains and means to make a good invesment out of rockets.

>Mars will eventually lose its atmosphere
In ten million years, sure.

Nigga its $2/10lbs at a gas station, just pop over to a Exxon and clear them out

Mine it from Mars!

Saturn's rings have more ice than Earth has water by a ton.

Any species that's made it this far will try to get you to let them use point buy.

That could be a terrifying first encounter. A Bracewell Probe arrives in system. It openly communicates with us but is concerned about our preferences for role-playing games. Random vs Point buy. Roll under vs roll over. Minis vs Theater of the Mind. Pizza vs Chinese take out. It is obviously testing us but in the most inane way possible and we have no idea how to find out what it wants to hear.

Because gigantic constructions that the whole planet depends upon are in no way fragile and surely will never be targeted by malicious forces.

Mars doesnt have the core mass to keep a viable atmosphere. Any water we put there will be blasted into space by cosmic radiation in years at best.

We quite literally have no way to profit from space right now. Infinity resources mean jack fucking shit if you can't get to them reliably, procure them reliable and get them back to Earth reliable.
Even ignoring the fact that even now we sometimes fail at even leaving our own fucking planet, the technology to even mine that shit would stell need to be developed and then you have NO GOOD WAY TO GET THAT SHIT BACK TO EARTH. The upfront investment is so utterly ludicriously high and the technology needed to even dream up the technology necessary for space mining hasn't been conceived yet. There's no point to it if you can make profits way easier by just dredging up and poisoning some more areas of Earth.

Allen Steele wrote an interesting novel using that premise. In it the "Face of Mars" is real and a labyrinth of sorts is discovered nearby. As you progress through the maze, you have to solve increasingly difficult problems involving mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc. Failure to solve a problem prevents you from advancing because the puzzle room in question kills you.

The final room presents a problem which several people have been unable to solve until someone realizes the "solution" is to exhibit creativity, in this case by performing music.

Solving the final puzzle doesn't give human access to the "treasure vault" everyone has been hoping for. Instead it triggers the launch of an alien spacecraft whose systems have been collecting all the knowledge it can about humans. Solving the last puzzle merely confirmed that the information gathered was worth bringing back.

Thousands, if not millions of years nigger. Before that even becomes an issue you need to get an atmosphere on Mars, then you have the very likely negative medium term effects of lower gravitation on humans because humans didn't evolve for one third and a bit of change the fucking gravitation of Earth, it's going to fucking wreck us and the completely busted magnetosphere shitting everything up.
Terraforming Mars to an earth-like habitat probably needs something that can seriously influence gravity without just needing more mass than exist right now in our solar system in free floating state. Because as it stands, there isn't even a fraction of the mass needed floating around in asteroids to make Mars heavy enough.

Wrong. The Orion Project was ready to go sixty years ago and carry 7000tons a pop on the moon with fifties tech.

You can't be fucking serious, because that still doesn't help you get that shit back to Earth, is still ludicriously expensive and is pretty much theoretical. If the history of space travel has told us anything, then "This is ready to go" is followed by a lot of explosions and years of iteration.
And good luck getting all those fucking nukes for regular use.

>won't profit within your own lifetime
what's the point desu

1 stage rocket, "big dumb booster". Bigger = Better and more economical.

Destroying/defending giant orbital constructions?

Sounds like a perfect plothook for a Gundam game.

You know it's a lot easier to get back to the Earth from the Moon than to get to the Moon from the Earth in the first place, right?

The point is landing that shit on the surface of Earth reliably, in a way that doesn't burn even more cash.

We've got tons of spare nukes just lying around ready to go. It's not like the US or Russia is using them for anything else.

How do we get space rocks back to Earth? Combination of aerobraking and lithobraking. No thrust needed!

Maybe metal hidrogen will do the trick. It is also theorized to be a room temperature superconductor. Isp of 1700s!

a thread died for this

If you want to seriously colonize space you need something like a launch loop or an orbital ring.

youtube.com/watch?v=Wj424akVM9w

"What the fuck are they talking about, general?"
"I don't know, Mr. President. I just don't know."

>How do we get space rocks back to Earth? Combination of aerobraking and lithobraking. No thrust needed!
So your solution is to bombard Earth with artificial meteors? What could possibly go wrong?

I prefer to think of it as a "controlled landing maneuver".

Personally, I think the Earth would look quite nice with a few more craters! Maybe in some particularly scenic locations like Siberia or the Australian Outback.

As hard as that makes me, I would be lying if I didn't point out that a launch loop would be more economic

You a fan of Issac Arthur too?

>when a retard who knows nothing on the topic at hand wants to larp the voice of reason

>because that still doesn't help you get that shit back to Earth

This is lolworthy.

>is still ludicriously expensive

Its not. Space travel costs peanuts compared to whats spent on social welfare and DoD

>and is pretty much theoretical.

A complete feasibility study with plants ready to build was presented in the fifties.

Then explain to us how your magical nuke rockets which were never built absolutely mean that we have a cheap, reliable and safe way to launch and land shit on Earth.

>Its not. Space travel costs peanuts compared to whats spent on social welfare and DoD
Only had to reach farthest to find something more expensive than this stillbirth of an idea.

Skyhooks or a combination of space gun + skyhook is the most probable of options so far. We already have the aircraft necessary to make contact with the hook.

Launch loop can be built today, and all on the ground, so it's not a matter of tech but will to make it.

Plus it can give scale and launch costs per kilo that nothing other then a ring station could rival.

Why not a combinationof launch loops and skyhooks?

It's not only a question if it can be made, but where and how safe it is. Safe not in a sense of it blowing up, but in a sense of it getting blown up.
First of all, where the fuck are you going to build the thing? Sure Earth is big and there's more than enough space for it, but finding a place that has feasible positioning, enough empty space and suitable weather and tectonic conditions is no small feat.
And then there's always the danger of straight up war and sabotage. One retard Allahu Ackbaring into it could cause ridiculous damage which won't destroy the thing because of it's sheer size, but still
And it also doesn't help you with landing stuff, unlike a hook, which is all round a lot harder to fuck up with hostile action

Because giant space cannons launching you with a big-ass boom are cool, god damn it.
Launch Loops and Space Guns are pretty similar, though and a Loop that only has to accelerate you enough so that the craft can easily make contact with the hook would probably dramatically reduce the loop's size and thus problems