Jump to content

Venus>Mars?


Recommended Posts

Posted

I don't understand the point of that video.


Is it just like, here's a few facts about Venus and why its better than Mars but also it sucks worse than Mars?

Posted

I've thought about colonization of Venus, but with cloud colonies there just wouldn't realistically be enough actual living space to allow a significant portion of the human population to live there. Granted, this is a universe where humanity has FTL travel and the ability to manipulate gravitrons, but the point about living space still stands since you're going to need most of the space on the platforms just for the equipment just to keep a cloud city afloat.


Since it's a universe with gravitron manipulation, then the issue of low gravity on Mars is effectively solved. So is the issue of transportation over interplanetary distances.


I'm not shitting on the idea of Venus colonies. I think those are a cool addition to the lore. But I just don't think they'll be that big or important in the grand scheme of things.

Posted
I've been looking to what resources would be on Venus to justify being there if anything. But eh, we'll see.

 

That's actually a massive issue. What's the reason for going there if we can't mine materials from the surface?

Posted

Same way as Ocean mining I'd presume. Just more advanced, and durable.



Edit: Plasma could be a potential factor, as I believe it needs oxygen to combust or whatever the pseudo chemistry is for it.

Posted

Not being able to spend more than a few hours on the surface, let alone the months and years required to carry out a mining operation, serves as a good deterrent. All resources would have to be transported from off-world.

Posted
Not being able to spend more than a few hours on the surface, let alone the months and years required to carry out a mining operation, serves as a good deterrent. All resources would have to be transported from off-world.

 

Reinforced Drones could probably be used ICly

Posted

It still might prove more trouble than it's worth, and much more expensive too. Besides, lower gravity allows for an easier time getting into orbit. 40% Earth gravity is actually a positive attribute towards Mars.

Posted
Not being able to spend more than a few hours on the surface, let alone the months and years required to carry out a mining operation, serves as a good deterrent. All resources would have to be transported from off-world.

 


I meant Deep Sea Mining.

 

nautilus_impacts.jpg

 


But spacey.

Posted

Why is everyone giving Luna the cold shoulder? I mean, the moon's right there at the edge of our neighborhood, we should colonize that first.

Posted

Uh, I didnt mean ICly.

I ment like, in real life.

Posted

Oh. Because it'd be practically impossible to colonize Luna despite its proximity.


Whatwith constant meteor bombardment, a complete and total lack of an atmosphere, soil that's basically ground up glass, and massive amounts of cosmic radiation.


Honestly, it'd be more realistic to colonize a planet like Mars than Luna. And probably more useful in the long run, too.

Posted

Mars is ehh. IRL there isn't a way to solve the gravity issue. Sure you can improve its atmosphere and so forth but you cant help it's mass to provide the gravity needed. Mars is pretty much an awful place to go in real life and in most science fiction.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...