Can Mars be terraformed without a magnetic field?

Question

How do current theories of terraforming take in account for Mars lack of a magnetic field? Without a magnetic field a planet is ravaged with harmful solar radiation and I watched a documentary that explains this is why Mars has such a weak atmosphere because it is gradually being destroyed by solar radiation.

I've watch the Mars Rising and when they discuss terraforming the planet they never once mention the lack of a magnetic field yet they thinking terraforming WILL occur. What am I missing....

Answer 1

It takes many millions of years for the solar wind to strip an atmosphere away. Not having a magnetic field while terraforming Mars would be the smallest of your problems.

Also making an artificial magnetic field for the planet would not cost more than 10^-3 of the whole operation.

No big deal. Tell us first where you are getting water and a new atmosphere from. Then we talk.

Answer 2

Not for a "short-term" terraformation (tens of thousands of years). An Earth-like atmosphere would itself shield an surface life from cosmic radiation - the lack of a magnetic field would become serious only over time as the solar wind and cosmic rays stripped the atmosphere away, as is believed to have actually occurred in Mars's history. As has been mentioned above, the magnetic field problem is likely a rounding error in the cost of terraformation, and totally irrelevant over time frames as great as any past human civilization has existed.

Answer 3

I don't think in this case that the lack of a strong mag field is a problem.

I should be possible to create an Martian atmosphere thick enough and dense enough to breathe comfortable which will provide enough radiation shielding for the sun and cosmic rays to be not much of a problem. The atmosphere will tend to leak away due to Mars' low escape velocity, but this is more of a maintenance issue when compared to terra-forming.

Also note that Mars is about twice the distance from the sun and the Earth and gets about a 1/4 of the hard solar radation.

Answer 4

You raise a good question, not having a significant magnetic field would mean that surface radiation would be higher but also it means that more radiation would get through to form more ozone.

Presuming we were to engineer an oceanic Mars, the atmosphere would be "reducing" significantly, Earth pretty successfully retains it's atmosphere because of it's ability to fend off magnetic solar storms, so strong solar events or such could create problems where the Martian atmosphere would need regular "replenishment" from either ice-asteroids or smaller comets routed to hit the atmosphere and "burn up".

Also, over time, microbes form magnetite so by virtue of micro-organisms being present on Mars, the mantle of the planet would become empregnated with the similar sorts of microbes which helped to form magnetite on Earth, so thousands or hundreds of thousands of years later, Mars in fact would have a weak magnetic field - probably sufficient to retain a more significant atmosphere on it's own.

Answer 5

A very interesting question and some of the answers are pretty good but omit something important.

I would think that human inhabitants will live under tough domes connected by tubes and served by a suitable transport system.

Mars still has an atmosphere - something blows the sand about - and it will offer some shielding.

With less gravity than earth, larger structures could be built than on earth using the same strength materials with less powerful and lighter structured machinery. It wouldn't take very long to set up a shielded complexes (some of which could be underground) with their own contained atmosphere.

Some of the huge shopping complexes in the USA and UK are big enough to shelter a considerable number of people; enough for a large village or small town. They are air conditioned too, so the blueprint for an inhabitable structure already exists.

There should be plenty of minerals and ores on mars and we know there are rocks (for building) and some water. I think this approach could be adopted rapidly.

The fewer resources we need to transport to Mars the better and if there are resources there ready waiting for us to dig up we needn't worry about terraforming Mars in the open, we can do it under cover.

This would be a very exciting (ad)venture and I just wish that the powers that be would get together and get on with it instead of waisting money on the arms race.

One of the things that needs to be done if the Earth is to continue supporting life is to stop the Moon from drifting away as it is destined to do at about 3 inches a year I think.

If there are suitable raw materials on the moon, so it would be far cheaper to transport them from the Moon to Mars and, over time, reduce the Moon's drift a little.

We wouldn't have to use rocket power to lift materials from the Moon's surface, be could utilise a maglev track to accellerate a payload to escape velocity and bulk payloads could be unmanned and their trajectory planned so that they enter a Mars orbit or parachute directly to a safe landing zone.

Whoa! It's easy to get carried away with this subject isn't it?

Answer 6

Mars magnetic field, or lack there of, is only one part in why Mars is not a livable planet. Mars mass is too low to generate one. Nor is it massive enough to hold onto a significant atmosphere. The lack of sufficient gravitational pull is the main reason for why Mars does not have a denser atmosphere. It had one once but lost it. Until you figure out how to increase Mars mass til the point where it can hold onto whatever atmosphere we can recreate all efforts to terraform Mars are pointless.

Answer 7

There are some organisms, for instance Gingko biloba and presumably also various micro-organisms, which are quite resistant to radiation. If these were used after a whole load of carbon dioxide was provided to convert it to oxygen, that might work. Also, the radiation itself could split water vapour in the atmosphere, given a very dense one, into oxygen and hydrogen, then the hydrogen would leave. An ozone layer would also be generated. I think the result would probably be a planet where you could breathe the air and come out at night or near the poles, but either stay underground, in domes or at the bottom of the sea during the day. In which case, it probably wouldn't be worth the effort.

Answer 8

The lack of a magnetic field means Mars can't have a self-sustaining Earthlike atmosphere; terraform it and it'd be back to its present state in a geologic instant. But solar wind erosion of the atmosphere is a long-term process by human standards. "A geologic instant" here means millions of years; in the short term a terraformed Mars should be suitable to human habitation.

Answer 9

you will need different things to terraform mars, Large orbital mirrors that will reflect sunlight and heat the Mars surface.
Greenhouse gas-producing factories to trap solar radiation.
Smashing ammonia-heavy asteroids into the planet to raise the greenhouse gas level,

other than that, it is believed that there is ice frozen under the surface ear the poles,
so making underground bases would protect us from the radiation, and give us a starting point to work from, to introduce greenhouse gas producing factories, wihin a amospheric under ground base, this is probably the way it will start.

And introduce other technologies on the way, we will need to terraform mars, maybe it will take thousands of years but i believe without a doubt we will :)

Answer 10

No it can't, our magnetic field is the only thing that keeps our planet from be ravaged by the power of the sun, destroying all life on the planet. Unless you can find a way to do the same without one Mars will never be inhabitable.