Science and Astronomy Questions
Posted: 09 Dec 2018 02:48
I have split the discussion on population growth to a new thread here.
Ultimate space simulation software
A-L-E-X wrote:Source of the post devices that would be addictive for children (even toddlers)- similar to fast food-, the NIH is currently conducting a long term study and the early results seem to bear this out. MRI exams of kids using devices for 2 or more hours a day show changes in brain structure.
Stellarator wrote:A-L-E-X wrote:Source of the post devices that would be addictive for children (even toddlers)- similar to fast food-, the NIH is currently conducting a long term study and the early results seem to bear this out. MRI exams of kids using devices for 2 or more hours a day show changes in brain structure.
I'm getting flashbacks from the eighties when the tobacco companies were willing to admit that cigarettes cause respiratory diseases including multiple types of cancers. Not really a perfect analog here, and of course lots of people still smoke, so....
Source of the post Thanks! I remember reading articles about photosynthetic compounds on certain planets could be different colors, like purple, pink, blue or violet, it would be fun to see plants of that color implemented in the program! We already have plants of those colors on earth, but they are predominantly green (because green is the middle of the spectrum?)
PlutonianEmpire wrote:Source of the post 1) How powerful would this generator and its field need to be for most of Mars to be in a 0.5 to 1.0 Gauss range? (Similar to Earth's, right?)
PlutonianEmpire wrote:Source of the post 2) What would be the logistics of such an endeavor?
PlutonianEmpire wrote:Source of the post 3) Can this be done with current technologies? And what might the object itself look like?
PlutonianEmpire wrote:Source of the post 4) Given Mars' current natural processes and environment, would the atmosphere start to build itself up, given the above Gauss range?
Stellarator wrote:Source of the post Here is a sort of riddle for the forum:
Watsisname wrote:Stellarator, I don't think either of those findings would imply that at all.
It sounds like you are referencing the idea of a great filter, but that is a deeply statistical kind of thing involving probabilistic events across a large numbers of planets, while finding evidence of extinct life on Mars is a single data point. Concluding anything about a great filter from that is a very weak argument. It would be like claiming what the temperature of a gas is by measuring the speed of one atom in it. Nobody who understands what temperature means would take it seriously.
Another problem with this argument is that finding fossils on Mars would not mean that all life on Mars is extinct. All it would show is that life got started on Mars.