Earth 2.0 Theory

[Deacon]

The famed wheelchair bound Professor Hawking, who speaks through a computerized voice box after being left paralyzed by motor neuron disease at the age of 20, has recently theorized that the survival of the human race depends on its ability to find new homes elsewhere in the universe because there's an increasing risk that a disaster (induced by global warming) will destroy Earth.

Do you think we should start looking more in depth for another planet to migrate to after we screw-up Earth.



I think we should go to Mars, and here is how we can do it. By releasing greenhouse gases into the Martian Atmoshpere the planet would eventually warm. The caps of Mars which most think contain ice. the melting of the ice would create oceans and revive the planet letting plants create a more adaptable atmoshpere. (Farfetched I Know)

[BoogyMan]

We really should try to develop space travel vehicles that don't explode when you pass gas in them first. I may be the only one here who feels this way but the vehicles we use to travel into space are so volatile that sending any kind of sizeable populace into space seems completely undoable.

[Deacon]

Exactly, I think a spaceport, where big transport will dock and specialized shuttles will bring the people from Earth to the spaceport then to their transport, but we still need to find out where to go

[rodeojones903]

Earth 2 > all

http://www.superman.ws/kal-l/superman/images/IC01Last.jpg

[Labrocca]

Interesting that Hawkins said this.Â*Â*Also we wouldn't shuttle people we would use a space elevator.

http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/lunar_space_elevator.html

A space elevator is actually a plausable theory and I bet we have one within 200 years possibly much sooner.Â*Â*The need to terraform other planets will definitely be important.Â*Â*If you have interest in these subjects I suggest you read Robinson's Mars Trilogy.

Red Mars (http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?link_code=ur2&tag=multimedia1-20&camp=1789&creative=9325&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2Fgp%2Fproduc t%2F0553560735%2Fsr%3D8-1%2Fqid%3D1153434596%2Fref%3Dpd_bbs_1%3Fie%3DUTF8)

[Nathan Brazil]

Red Mars was boring and I never finished it.

Frankly, Mars ain't big enough to absorb Earth's surplus, and fixing Venus up to a liveable state would take somewhere around 15,000 years, and interstellar travel is simply impossible for a species that thinks the Columbia accident was a big deal.

Anyway, before we start worrying about Mars, we should focus on the moon and the smaller airless bodies, especially the comets. Not to live on, but to exploit. Once those commercial ventures are profitable, then maybe it would make sense to explore Mars in depth.

[Anti-Racism]

I would hope that, space elevator or no, we would not trash our home planet. It's a beautiful thing in and of itself.

[Mayberry]

Our planet has survived worse things than us. When mother Earth gets tired of us, she'll slough us off quick enough, and it'll be like we were never here.

[Anti-Racism]

Our planet has survived worse things than us. When mother Earth gets tired of us, she'll slough us off quick enough, and it'll be like we were never here.


I would like to avoid that as well, as despite its flaws I'm sort of fond of humanity. Mother Earth may slough us off, but how many species will be missing the meantime?

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

It seems more practical to build a shield around earth than go traipsing off to who knows where.

[underdawg]

Species come and go. It happens all the time. Most likey the human species will disappear. We will alter our environment so much , that we will not be able to adapt. We will drown in our own filth and waste products, but the good thing is that life always finds ways eventually to utilize waste products, so what ever nasty chemicals and pollution we make, something will come along to eat them, the bad part is that we will not be here to see it.

Personally I am not ready to see the next evolutionary change to this planet. Call me nostalgic, but I would hate to see such animals as elephants and tigers among others go extinct. We could do things to stave the extinctions off for a time, but by our very nature, it seems inevitable that human activity will bring about our own demise and the end of our current ecosystem. I am rather fond of the life forms we have now. I am sure the ones to come will be just as diverse and unusual as what we have now. It is just sad to see the old things making way for the new.

[Anti-Racism]

Most likey the human species will disappear. We will alter our environment so much , that we will not be able to adapt. We will drown in our own filth and waste products, but the good thing is that life always finds ways eventually to utilize waste products, so what ever nasty chemicals and pollution we make, something will come along to eat them, the bad part is that we will not be here to see it.


Hmm. We replace creatures capable of writing symphonies with earthworms... seems psychotic.

[MAP2010.wireless]

The famed wheelchair bound Professor Hawking, who speaks through a computerized voice box after being left paralyzed by motor neuron disease at the age of 20, has recently theorized that the survival of the human race depends on its ability to find new homes elsewhere in the universe because there's an increasing risk that a disaster (induced by global warming) will destroy Earth.

Do you think we should start looking more in depth for another planet to migrate to after we screw-up Earth.




I think we should go to Mars, and here is how we can do it. By releasing greenhouse gases into the Martian Atmoshpere the planet would eventually warm. The caps of Mars which most think contain ice. the melting of the ice would create oceans and revive the planet letting plants create a more adaptable atmoshpere. (Farfetched I Know)


The time it would take to design a new earth, you could fix our planet.

Same Idea but travel is the hard part so we should fix earth then later use that idea on other planets.

(A) Photo: You use the water to force to power that water to be used to clean the air then you clean the water to drink.


"The mixtures of oxygen isotopes in the Earth, Mars, and the asteroids differ slightly. If we knew why they differ we could learn more about the origin of asteroids and planets and the formation of the solar system. My colleague Sasha Krot and I describe one solution to part of this puzzle. We show how particles in primitive meteorites could have formed from gas and dust close to the Sun. This causes the particles to acquire different mixtures of oxygen isotopes from diverse stars that were ancestors to our own. Planets and asteroids inherited slightly different mixtures of oxygen atoms because they formed from materials like those in primitive meteorites."

The Informative Isotopes of Oxygen

There are three stable varieties of oxygen atoms called isotopes that have the same chemical properties but masses that differ by ratios of 16:17:18. The mass of each atom depends on the total number of neutrons and protons that it contains. Most oxygen atoms contain 8 neutrons and 8 protons, which all have the same mass. In our solar system, about 1 in 500 oxygen atoms contains an extra neutron and is 17/16 times heavier. About 1 in 2000 contains two extra neutrons and is 18/16 times heavier. The three types of oxygen atoms are called 16O, 17O, and 18O.

The oxygen atoms in rocks that you pick up on Earth do not have identical proportions of 16O, 17O, and 18O atoms but the ratios of these isotopes follow a simple relationship that is controlled by their masses. Rocks with the same 18O / 16O ratio will have the same 17O / 16O ratios. But if their 18O / 16O ratios differ by say 0.2%, their 17O / 16O ratios will differ by half this amount, 0.1%.

http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Dec01/Oisotopes.html

That planet would need the right ratio with everything for us to live on it.

Mark

[dgridley]

Of course, this may all be a moot point as apparently there is a possibility of an asteroid hitting the earth in 2036..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,1950258,00.html

The fact they're even talking about sending a manned flight up to nudge the asteroid off-course suggests to me that it may be more a danger than we think.


Interesting that Hawkins said this.Â*Â*Also we wouldn't shuttle people we would use a space elevator.

http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/lunar_space_elevator.html

A space elevator is actually a plausable theory and I bet we have one within 200 years possibly much sooner.Â*Â*The need to terraform other planets will definitely be important.Â*Â*If you have interest in these subjects I suggest you read Robinson's Mars Trilogy.

Red Mars (http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?link_code=ur2&tag=multimedia1-20&camp=1789&creative=9325&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2Fgp%2Fproduc t%2F0553560735%2Fsr%3D8-1%2Fqid%3D1153434596%2Fref%3Dpd_bbs_1%3Fie%3DUTF8)

[Cameron Mineral]

The professor missed his calling: he should have been a science-fiction author.

[Waffletush]

Earth first!Â*Â*We'll strip mine the other planets later!

(yea! 100 posts!)