2007-03-28 16:51:54 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
I think as a concept it is very interesting. But....I don't think we need any more worlds to destroy. I think we already lost our deposit on this one and we need to fix the sink and walls before we move on.
2007-03-28 17:02:02 · answer #1 · answered by Killer Klingon 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the time it takes makes it impossible to predict; yet the hypothetics are what intreagues people. Will Mars terraform? Who knows? I don't care because I won't be around for that. For it to become inhabitable (which is debatable by NASA), more than terraforming has to occur. It is still very close to the sun. Some bacteria like it hot. I am not smart enough to know all the variables.
2007-03-28 23:59:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Planet terraforming in a timeframe of any use would require vast amounts of energy, resources, and technology we dont have yet. It wouldn't suprize me if this become a area of expertise in the future, mabye 100 years. But I forsee our first space colonies to be bio-sphere-ish.
2007-03-29 00:04:42 · answer #3 · answered by Former Republican 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it's cheaper to terraform Mars than try to save Earth.
2007-03-29 00:11:57 · answer #4 · answered by Scythian1950 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It could be done with von Neumann machines. These are machines that build copies of themselves. A batch could be sent to a planet like Mars, replicate themselves by the billions then start generating atmosphere or anything else they were designed to do, even eat mountains or build cities, anything!
2007-03-29 00:00:38 · answer #5 · answered by Michael da Man 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
fascinating. being able to colonize other planets.
2007-03-29 08:10:51 · answer #6 · answered by neutron 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋