For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
-
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
Or, we could just spend a few billion and ten years to develop a wormhole generator, open one mouth in the upper troposphere of Venus and the other on Mars, and flood the whole planet with CO2, nitrogen and water vapor. Seems the cheapest way to go to me, and it is at least possible, we could terraform Venus at the same time by removing what is really too much atmo. Would be good if we could find a way to precipitate out the sulfur while doing all this.
Three happy planets.
Three happy planets.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
Presuming you had traversable wormhole tech, atmosphere isn't going to just flow from Venus to Mars without some kind of pump to drive it.
The daylight is uncomfortably bright for eyes so long in the dark.
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
Don't know how your "wormhole" would work but Venus' atmospheric pressure is roughly 90 atmospheres, Mars much less than 1 atmosphere (I think about 1% of earth's); so the pressure would flow from Venus to Mars.hanelyp wrote:Presuming you had traversable wormhole tech, atmosphere isn't going to just flow from Venus to Mars without some kind of pump to drive it.
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
I'm thinking in terms of gravitational potential between Venus and Mars.
The daylight is uncomfortably bright for eyes so long in the dark.
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
mmmmm, nope, slipped up and put the wrong units, but we knew what you meant.Venus' atmospheric pressure is roughly 90 atmospheres,
Counting the days to commercial fusion. It is not that long now.
-
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
Yes well, even at the top of the troposphere and less than a single atmosphere, the gasses there would not doubt cause a ruckus rushing in at fantastical speeds. NO need to pump.
Don't see the point about gravitational potential. What were you getting at?
Don't see the point about gravitational potential. What were you getting at?
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
GIThruster wrote:Yes well, even at the top of the troposphere and less than a single atmosphere, the gasses there would not doubt cause a ruckus rushing in at fantastical speeds. NO need to pump.
Don't see the point about gravitational potential. What were you getting at?
Both Venus and Mars are in the suns gravitational well. I haven't ran any numbers, but i'm pretty sure that 90 atmospheres isn't going to be enough pressure.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
-
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
I'm completely missing the point about the gravity well. How would it affect passage through a wormhole? At the surface of the wormhole atmo disappears, so there is relative vacuum there. All the particles in the atmo that strike the horizon vanish, and they are all moving at a significant fraction of c. If anything, you'd have a terrible time keeping the generator in p[lace, from all the gas striking it that does not go through.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
What Diogenes said. I'm also assuming the wormhole conserves energy and momentum.
The daylight is uncomfortably bright for eyes so long in the dark.
-
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
How does the existence or non-existence of a gravity well affect how gasses would push into a wormhole throat? We seem to be presuming different things about wormholes and I can't tell what they are.
Yes, wormholes to conserve momentum and energy, but you need to draw your box big enough for both ends of the thing.
Yes, wormholes to conserve momentum and energy, but you need to draw your box big enough for both ends of the thing.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
Think of it this way - a wormhole is just part of space. Since gravity is a potential field (to first order, at least - I need to learn more GR), the difference in gravitational potential between two points is the same whether you traverse the distance through a wormhole or through normal space. And if the wormhole is a much shorter trip, the gravity gradient through it will be much steeper - it's like scaling a wall instead of using the stairs. I believe I researched this a while back and concluded that it's probably correct, and that wormhole back reaction is probably a nonphysical artifact of a silly way of doing the math. Not being a GR specialist, I can't guarantee this conclusion, so don't quote me on it...
That said, if you wait until Venus and Mars are on opposite sides of the Sun, the relative velocity would seem to be large enough to ram Venus' atmosphere through the wormhole...
That said, if you wait until Venus and Mars are on opposite sides of the Sun, the relative velocity would seem to be large enough to ram Venus' atmosphere through the wormhole...
Last edited by 93143 on Sat Aug 23, 2014 3:15 am, edited 2 times in total.
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
GIThruster wrote:How does the existence or non-existence of a gravity well affect how gasses would push into a wormhole throat? We seem to be presuming different things about wormholes and I can't tell what they are.
Yes, wormholes to conserve momentum and energy, but you need to draw your box big enough for both ends of the thing.
Well if a wormhole works like a tube, then it will have to deal with differences in gravitational gradient. If it doesn't, it is a perpetual motion machine.
Put something in one end, and let it fall out the other. Extract the gravitational energy continuously.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
-
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
I am certainly not the expert on wormholes, but as I understand it, both mouths of the wormhole require a huge gravitic gradient that dwarfs the background gradient. In fact, the Jupiter mass of negative matter necessary to create an absurdly benign wormhole--one that a person can pass through without being crushed--is only necessary for such wormholes. One can make smaller, easier wormholes with a much higher gradient, IIUC. Regardless, once the mass leaves the space of the gradient, say the upper troposphere of Venus, it goes through a zero gradient tube and back out into the new gradient. I don't think the gradient from each side connects but I could be wrong. The fantastic gradients on each end would seem to me like hills or valleys that could work like a syphon and flow the gasses one end to the other, if gasses worked that way. They don't. Only liquids work that way. So really we're only looking at the much stronger gas pressure gradient. Every gas molecule that touches the event horizon of the wormhole is going to disappear and thus create vacuum at that point, and the remaining gas will then rush in to take its place. So it is the gas pressure gradient that is the one to look at.
I think. . .
As to perpetual motion, well remember that all this stuff steals momentum from the rest of the universe, so even if you observe what appears a conservation violation, this is only because you're not looking at the whole system. You need to look at conservation of the whole system, which is the universe. There is nothing stopping the harvest of universal "momenergy" but the cost of such harvest is to speed up the end of the universe. All M-E technology should essentially cause the universe accelerate in its expansion, which is one of those things we routinely observe and can't explain, at least without M-E physics.
I think. . .
As to perpetual motion, well remember that all this stuff steals momentum from the rest of the universe, so even if you observe what appears a conservation violation, this is only because you're not looking at the whole system. You need to look at conservation of the whole system, which is the universe. There is nothing stopping the harvest of universal "momenergy" but the cost of such harvest is to speed up the end of the universe. All M-E technology should essentially cause the universe accelerate in its expansion, which is one of those things we routinely observe and can't explain, at least without M-E physics.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
Re: For the same pricetag to mitigate climate change
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_vector_field
It doesn't matter what's happening near the mouths of the wormhole; the net result will be the same.
And what's this about an event horizon? A traversable wormhole shouldn't have an event horizon in the path of the matter traversing it...
It doesn't matter what's happening near the mouths of the wormhole; the net result will be the same.
And what's this about an event horizon? A traversable wormhole shouldn't have an event horizon in the path of the matter traversing it...