On Wednesday, February 16, 2000 7:08 PM James Swayze swayzej@earthlink.net
wrote:
> A little off the subject but can someone explain to me why people
promoting the
> terraforming of Mars still think it will hold a man made atmosphere
despite the
> believed theory that it lost it's atmosphere in the first place due to
it's
> diminutive size and thus lack of sufficient gravity?
It would still take a long time for the atmosphere to seep away and one
could always continue to replenish it.
> Don't get me wrong I want
> us to go there and I feel we could live there.
Why? I don't want to spend time near so much gravity.:) I would prefer a
free floating existence -- or one inside a hollowed out asteroid. Either
way, I'd prefer to roam over staying on some world for thousands of years or
more. I've already been there, done that, but I didn't get a tee shirt for
it.:)
It's kind of cute how a lot of people want to move into space only to
recreate Earth.
> I believe, though, we can only
> live there under a man made roof to hold in the atmosphere. I asked R.
Zubrin
> this question. All he said was go read his book. Geez, was a straight
answer so
> difficult? Perhaps he's only in it for the money as he was more interested
in my
> buying his book than answering a question that couldn't have taken but a
few
> words.
I haven't read his book either. Maybe he just didn't want to rehearse all
his arguments. Also, maybe he _is_ trying to make money. I don't see much
wrong with that. That's probably one reason why he wrote his book. "Those
limos aren't free, you know?":)
You can read my essay on space colonization at my site. It's probably not a
tenth as good as Zubrin's book -- heck, it's much, much shorter -- but it's
only a few mouse-clicks away.:)
L8R!
Daniel "doesn't want to terraform Mars" Ust
http://mars.superlink.net/neptune/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:03:50 MDT