Are there habitable planets/moons in our solar system?

[space noob]

No one seems to be considering the oxygen supply here? We know that terraforming is a possibility but it's slightly more complicated than just the basics

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecopoiesis

 

We have some if the technology to terraform but not the resources and with resources decreasing it may become less of a possibly

 

Oxygen complication:

http://everything2.com/title/How+much+plant+life+is+needed+to+keep+a+person+alive+in+a+sealed+room%253F

 

Plants causing a major issues:

http://www.enotes.com/science/q-and-a/why-do-plants-breath-oxygen-night-109969

 

And of course for plants we need a good medium to grow them in

 

I always had the idea as a kid that genetically engineering plants was a good idea, using genes that output more oxygen, sturdy plants that survive in harsh conditions, plants that can rely on the sun more so than water

[mindless]

Mars would be habitable if we landed a factory to produce methane (not cfcs because we need ozone) in vast amounts. Global warming would occur. The subsoil ice would melt and oceans would form. Some sort of alga could be used to produce oxygen - there is plenty of CO2 for photosynthesis. The atmosphere would be thin so you might need a compressor to breathe and would benefit from living in glass domes to shield from radiation.

Edited May 20, 2012 by mindless

[the asinine cretin]

I think we need large movable habitats in space, they could take very slow orbits from one asteroid to the next, refining the minerals on then and build copies of themselves and send refined metals or what ever the earth needed or sell and trade back and forth between colonies.

This concept would work better than sending out disposable probes and would be a stepping stone to colonies on the surface of planets. I think that once we begin the process of living in these freely orbiting colonies we will loose interest in planets...

 

I don't know if you say the link I posted on your wall, but I've long been fascinated by the kinds of scenarios you've here described. This video is nice.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDIo_SpFI60

 

 

The analogy of the Austronesian expansion comes to mind. It provides a means of interstellar expansion that does not require relativistic speeds or any of that. The "leap" would be from our Oort cloud to the Oort clouds of our nearest star, which may happen quite seamlessly. I suppose this may lead to a geometric expansion of life in our galaxy. This thought makes me recall the Fermi paradox. Hmm...

 

 

Edit: removed https from youtube vid so it renders properly.

Edited June 5, 2012 by the asinine cretin

[Moontanman]

Mars would be habitable if we landed a factory to produce methane (not cfcs because we need ozone) in vast amounts. Global warming would occur. The subsoil ice would melt and oceans would form. Some sort of alga could be used to produce oxygen - there is plenty of CO2 for photosynthesis. The atmosphere would be thin so you might need a compressor to breathe and would benefit from living in glass domes to shield from radiation.

 

 

What do you produce methane from? You need a source of hydrogen, very scarce on Mars...

[pantheory]

What do you produce methane from? You need a source of hydrogen, very scarce on Mars...

Methane can be manufactured from water and CO2. Both could be towed in from the asteroid belt since we would need more water for Mars when terraforming it. Methane could be manufactured in orbit via nuclear power as the energy source. Later when CO2 and water are vaporized at the poles more C02 could be dumped into the atmosphere with new methane which would rise above the heavier CO2 since it is less dense. Genetically modified plants could produce oxygen from the CO2 on the ground and the extra Oxygen from producing methane from water, could also be released into the atmosphere at a later time to eliminate the fire and explosive possibilities of methane at ground level near human habitats. Liquid methane with liquid oxygen may also be a safer and less expensive rocket fuel requiring less cryogenics.

//

Edited June 6, 2012 by pantheory