Current Events > Should we use giant fucking lasers to terraform Mars?

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpcTJW4ur54

Just need a giant laser built from mirrors 11 times the size of the United States lmao

Terraforming Mars sounds like something that has no useful purpose.

Because humans are not gonna fucking live on Mars.

Without a proper Magnetosphere, terraforming Mars is a waste of time.

DeadBankerDream posted...

Terraforming Mars sounds like something that has no useful purpose.

Because humans are not gonna fucking live on Mars.

but we could make it to where we can

Ezekiel2320 posted...

Without a proper Magnetosphere, terraforming Mars is a waste of time.

Surprisingly, the video has a solution for that, at least in regards to the solar winds aspect

Humans would rather go extinct on earth than live in dome cities on a frozen wasteland. And yes, even after terraforming mars and somehow transporting the water necessary to sustain a sizeable human population, it would still be a frozen wasteland we couldn't possibly live in directly.

DeadBankerDream posted...

Humans would rather go extinct on earth than live in dome cities on a frozen wasteland. And yes, even after terraforming mars and somehow transporting the water necessary to sustain a sizeable human population, it would still be a frozen wasteland we couldn't possibly live in directly.

That, and if the real goal is for the species to escape Sol's inevitable death we need to get way further than Mars.

It was a fun video to watch when it came out, but I like how people seem to be gungho about terraforming Mars or Venus when it'd be thousands of times less expensive to fix Earth, and we can't even do that right.

Didn't watch the video, but it sounds cool so yes.

Ezekiel2320 posted...

That, and if the real goal is for the species to escape Sol's inevitable death we need to get way further than Mars.

That's billions of years in the future, so we'd be able to colonize millions of planets by that point. Not that we'll ever make it that long.

Nemu posted...

That's billions of years in the future, so we'd be able to colonize millions of planets by that point.

Not in the reality we live in where the speed of light is a hard limit. Maybe in the fantasy of sci fi literature where we can just invent whatever the fuck ever to circumvent it.

Nemu posted...

That's billions of years in the future, so we'd be able to colonize millions of planets by that point. Not that we'll ever make it that long.

Assuming we don't fuck up, colonization of space is inevitable. But interstellar missions are going to be so prohibitively expensive without tangible benefit to the vast, vast majority of everyone left behind, that the number of times that we do it will assuredly be limited.

DeadBankerDream posted...

Not in the reality we live in where the speed of light is a hard limit. Maybe in the fantasy of sci fi literature where we can just invent whatever the fuck ever to circumvent it.

Under the assumption that we're able to overcome the great filter, we'd likely start sending off colony ships on the regular as a means of population control and resource gathering. We wouldn't be a united species at that point due to inability to easily communicate, but a species with stable colony ships and the means to terraform any planet would be able to spread like wildfire over the galaxy over millions of years, let alone billions. That would bring with it many of its own hurdles, but it's not impossible.

Nemu posted...

Under the assumption that we're able to overcome the great filter, we'd likely start sending off colony ships on the regular as a means of population control and resource gathering. We wouldn't be a united species at that point due to inability to easily communicate, but a species with stable colony ships and the means to terraform any planet would be able to spread like wildfire over the galaxy over millions of years, let alone billions. That would bring with it many of its own hurdles, but it's not impossible.

By that point on the technological scale, humanity's birthrate will probably be quite small (if not negative), as is the case in developed nations already. We're not going to be a species suddenly crowded in the solar system at any point. The trope of a future with hundreds of billions of humans doesn't really fit any population model that makes sense beyond fearmongering about the birthrates in poorer countries.

And resource gathering would be a fool's errand. We have a near limitless supply in our system as it is, and it's not like we could economically ship anything back here. Resources will only be an issue if at the vastly distant future if we as a species all need to leave Sol.

And I'm sure thousands of years from now there will be a push to colonize out of our system to ensure survival of the species, but that pressure is the kind of thing that'd be the incentive for a few missions, not thousands to millions of missions.

Will we call it Preparation H?

K181 posted...

By that point on the technological scale, humanity's birthrate will probably be quite small (if not negative), as is the case in developed nations already. We're not going to be a species suddenly crowded in the solar system at any point. The trope of a future with hundreds of billions of humans doesn't really fit any population model that makes sense beyond fearmongering about the birthrates in poorer countries.

And resource gathering would be a fool's errand. We have a near limitless supply in our system as it is, and it's not like we could economically ship anything back here. Resources will only be an issue if at the vastly distant future if we as a species all need to leave Sol.

And I'm sure thousands of years from now there will be a push to colonize out of our system to ensure survival of the species, but that pressure is the kind of thing that'd be the incentive for a few missions, not thousands to millions of missions.

I don't think you can apply statistics on birthrates as they exist and have existed now to create a theory of human behavior as an interplanetary species.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0RCxq0q8KI

K181 posted...

By that point on the technological scale, humanity's birthrate will probably be quite small, as is the case in developed nations already. We're not going to be a species suddenly crowded in the solar system at any point.

And resource gathering would be a fool's errand. We have a near limitless supply in our system as it is, and it's not like we could economically ship anything back here. Resources will only be an issue if at the vastly distant future if we as a special all need to leave Sol.

And I'm sure thousands of years from now there will be a push to colonize out of our system to ensure survival of the species, but that pressure is the kind of thing that'd be the incentive for a few missions, not thousands to millions of missions.

I feel like a society that has reached the stars will probably have a much different view on childbearing by that point. Adding in the possibility of advancements in machine gestation and custom-ordered kids, that'll open up many more possibilities.

How quickly we'll strip mine the solar system depends on how expansive we become. If our society advances to the point of making shit like dyson spheres, then I could see us ripping out every single mineable resource. In that case, I think we'd probably branch off quite far.

Ultimately, we'll probably kill ourselves on this rock, but hypothetically, I'd see us spreading out like the plague if we made it far enough.

DeadBankerDream posted...

I don't think you can apply statistics on birthrates as they exist and have existed now to create a theory of human behavior as an interplanetary species.

Sure... but you tried to do that as an argument for population control in the far distant future, which makes no sense based on everything we know.

If there's a future where we are advanced enough to launch interstellar missions, we're not going to have a society that remotely needs a massively growing population nor would there be an incentive for women to have multiple children to the degree necessarily to realistically worry about overpopulation on the scale of our solar system.

I don't remember doing that.

It is all fun and games until somebody decides to turn the giant mirror towards Earth.

Nemu posted...

I feel like a society that has reached the stars will probably have a much different view on childbearing by that point. Adding in the possibility of advancements in machine gestation and custom-ordered kids, that'll open up many more possibilities.

There's really nothing backing up the idea that a technologically advanced and wealthy society would remotely be interested in having loads more kids.

How quickly we'll strip mine the solar system depends on how expansive we become. If our society advances to the point of making shit like dyson spheres, then I could see us ripping out every single mineable resource. In that case, I think we'd probably branch off quite far.

I think you're underestimating how much resources are there in the solar system. There are assuredly countless trans neptunian objects that alone have enough mineral wealth for humanity for millions of years.

DeadBankerDream posted...

I don't remember doing that.

My bad, i crossed posters i was quoting.

But the point would be that no model that makes sense makes a need for population control being a worthwhile incentive for Interstellar colonization.

K181 posted...

But interstellar missions are going to be so prohibitively expensive

Find a way to safely de-orbit sizable asteroids and we'll have enough raw materials so as to make money meaningless.

In other words, it'll never happen. Too many moneyed interests invested in the commodities markets for that to be "allowed".

K181 posted...

I think you're underestimating how much resources are there in the solar system. There are assuredly countless trans neptunian objects that alone have enough mineral wealth for humanity for millions of years.

If we're talking about megastructures surpassing the size of stars, I'm pretty sure we'll need to dip outside of the solar system for that. Even a hollow structure encompassing the sun would probably take more resources than we have available, and I imagine that's only one of many insane things a super advanced society could make.

You had me at giant fucking lasers

Ezekiel2320 posted...

Find a way to safely de-orbit sizable asteroids and we'll have enough raw materials so as to make money meaningless.

In other words, it'll never happen. Too many moneyed interests invested in the commodities markets for that to be "allowed".

Except we'd be able to live without limits here when that happens, so even then there'd be no point in that set of a future humanity ever needing to colonize orher stars.

Nemu posted...

If we're talking about megastructures surpassing the size of stars, I'm pretty sure we'll need to dip outside of the solar system for that. Even a hollow structure encompassing the sun would probably take more resources than we have available, and I imagine that's only one of many insane things a super advanced society could make.

A solid dyson sphere has basically been mathematically proven to be gravitationally impossible, even according to Dyson himself.

However, according to another video that the channel in the OP made, building an actually manageable dyson shell/swarm of solar panels around the sun would basically cost Mercury. It'd actually easily manageable if we have the technology to do so, and that'd be without tapping our vast Oort cloud wealth.

https://youtu.be/pP44EPBMb8A

There's no way to suggest any plan - for any purpose - that involves Giant Space Lasers without sounding like a certified supervillain.

For that reason, I'm in.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/8/5/0/AARLwzAAD_Va.jpg

Man after all that work I did.

Why the hell should we move to Mars? The Earth is already 100x better at what human life needs than Mars. Even IF we terraform it perfectly, it's only a matter of time before humans fuck it up yet again. And any technology used to terraform Mars could be 1000x more useful on Earth.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Man after all that work I did.

So great, the whole topic had to stop and look

Would be so much easier to just live under the surface of mars

VampireCoyote posted...

Would be so much easier to just live under the surface of mars

but the point is to have a second Earth

I prefer we use genetically engineered roaches and then check to see if they become humanoid in 200 years.

Do not watch Terraformars season 2

wackyteen posted...

but the point is to have a second Earth

well we dont get everything

They're just disguising it as a terraformer but will quickly turn its sights on Earth as a superweapon to blow up any nation off the map.

Tyranthraxus posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/8/5/0/AARLwzAAD_Va.jpg

Have fun while the sun erodes your atmosphere as fast as you can make it.

We're probably better off trying to steer massive comets into Venus.

I kinda feel like we should just leave mars alone.

Yeah, thanks, but no thanks. The amount of resources, time, and effort would be for nothing. We'd kill ourselves before the project even completed.

BuckVanHammer posted...

I kinda feel like we should just leave mars alone.

Imagine we start terraforming Mars and the unseen alien overlords intervene to stop us from violating the natural order of things

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

fucking watch me