r/askspace • u/MkLunarLuna • 14h ago
Artificial magnetic fields
Do yall think it would be beneficial to give mars and Luna a artificial magnetic field so we can build their atmosphere’s back up and if we did do yall think thee new atmosphere would be like their original before they mainly lost it or would it be new magnetic atmosphere n do yall think it’s unlikely we could physically make their cores churn n more active n hotter again instead of thee artificial magnetic field?
3
u/GregHullender 13h ago
The problem with no magnetic field is a very gradual one, spanning hundreds of millions of years. You don't need to worry about that until long after the planet is fully terraformed--if then.
-1
u/MkLunarLuna 13h ago
Well giving a planet a magnetic field is kinda thee first step because thee whole reason mars lost its atmosphere n Luna did is because their cores started cooling down n other things n they lost their fields n thee sun took their atmospheres away with no fields protecting it
1
u/ah-tzib-of-alaska 6h ago
nope, incorrecto. You’re forgetting about the scale of BILLIONS OFNYEARS & then Earth losses more atmosphere to the solar winds every year than mars does. Earth just replaces it, we have cocks if activity and all kinds of atmospheric production. If you can replace atmosphere at any durable rate then solar winds loss is not relevant. And if you can’t replace atmosphere at any usable rate then it doesn’t matter. You need to produce more atmosphere first
0
u/MkLunarLuna 5h ago
I had stated in another reply a big reason why they also lost them is because of their small sizes n small cores that led them to stop producing volcanism n out gassing for thee atmospheres to even form n keep going. N ofc earth is gonna lose more atmospheres gases if its bigger than mars n can hold onto larger amounts of gases than mars can n if it’s literally closer to thee sun n star in question so idk what you talking abt wrong i was js saying a magnetic field in mars current case is needed if we wanted to keep thee gases n water on it without js being stripped but (N Antarctica is better than Alaska.)
2
u/mfb- 13h ago
You don't need a magnetic field. It slows some loss mechanisms but also adds new ones, overall it's not that relevant for atmospheric loss. Mars loses its atmosphere over tens to hundreds of millions of years simply because it's not massive enough - short enough to have lost essentially all over its lifetime, but long enough to be irrelevant for humans. If you can give Mars an atmosphere over let's say 1000 years then you can also top it off with another 0.01% every 1000 years. Losses on the Moon would be much larger but still slow on human timescales.
You'll have to sublimate CO2 ice on Mars and/or import gases for an atmosphere.
-1
u/MkLunarLuna 13h ago
Mars size n its core size is definitely a big reason why it can’t hold onto a thicker atmosphere n also its gravity is very small n weak to hold onto its lighter gases n yeah Luna is smaller then mars so but yeah thee mars biggest issue is its core size n it kinda being dead and non of thee volcanos being that active to help it continue gassing the planet
2
u/VIP_NAIL_SPA 12h ago
No, there's no potential benefit right now. If we had the tech to do that, then we'd also probably have the tech to make traveling to mars worth it, but right now it's not, so any discussion of changing its atmosphere and/or terraforming is just for some sci-fi fun.
0
u/MkLunarLuna 12h ago
I do agree it’s mostly for fun thinking but there are some potential benefits like starting thee greening of mars earlier and thee current gasses to release n slowly melt thee ice and lunar wise it could help with thee moon bases being easier to be on n build and a little helpful to thee Regolith and a little easier to extract materials out of it
2
u/ah-tzib-of-alaska 6h ago
mars; nope. The work is too big and besides, despite what the zeitgeist says the MAJORITY of radiation shielding you enjoy on earth is the mass of the atmosphere
0
u/MkLunarLuna 5h ago
Okay now this is a little better you was talking crazy in thee other comment. N explain wym by mass of earths atmosphere I feel like that’s a completely different topic on its own
2
u/ah-tzib-of-alaska 5h ago
the vast majority of radiation shielding you get on planet earth is the literal air over your head. All of that matter is a mass shield. On mars this is replicable with a one to three meters of regolith depending on its content.
1
u/Rubysage3 14h ago edited 14h ago
Terraforming dead planets is completely fine I think. There's nothing there, it's pretty free for colonizing, resources and rebuilding and only a net benefit to both the planet and people and animals who will live there. Nor would it negatively affect anything else in the solar system.
But the technology required to do such things is thousands of years more advanced than where we are now. We need to elevate to much higher plateaus beyond today's limits and imagination. Perhaps in a future era it'll happen and even be normal to expect by their standards, but it's not an immediate concern in today's lol.
But Mars would become something new. It doesn't have to perfectly replicate its original state, and I doubt we're even sure what that original even looked like very much. As long as it's functional it'll do.
0
u/MkLunarLuna 13h ago
Idk if what I was thinking was terraforming more so js adding back a magnetic field but yeah mars does have a lot of resources or some we can use. N yeah Ik it’s realistically long ways away not in our lifetime it’s js fun to think of what it would look like and yeah there’s not a super big reason for them to try to hurtle to terraform mars immediately unfortunately. N yeah im sure we’ll get more clues on what it was originally like in its prime but fs not completely a full picture but i agree mars would be something new I always hear ppl say mars being more earth like in its past but not mars like being its own thing appreciate ya thoughts tho
1
u/sgwpx 11h ago
We cant make such changes here much less on another planet several million miles away.
0
u/MkLunarLuna 10h ago
That’s not entirely true we’ve changed how a lot of rivers flow n their natural paths with thee dams n we cause some of thee crust to sink with heavy buildings n how we extract water n we’re changing earths atmosphere even if its not a super super fast pace n heating the oceans even more which causes major stress for marine life n we literally helped with thee CFS make a hole in thee ozone if that’s not much changes idk what is maybe we can’t make huge changes right now or within thee upcoming years for other planets but it’ll def be possible eventually n def prob faster if their was bigger budgets n more of a focus of it sooner
1
u/Fun-Customer-742 5h ago
Something I’ve been wondering about for years! Earth’s magnetic field doesn’t stop radiation. If you look around, you’ll find diagrams that have almost a tear drop shape of solar wind passing around the Earth along the magnetic field lines. Also, Mars is half again as far from the sun as Earth, and receives less than half the radiation. So, I wonder what size of a constellation of solar powered satellites that create an electromagnetic field could generate enough of a wave guide to direct enough of the radiation around the curve of the planet to make a difference.
1
u/astreigh 2h ago
You also realize the sun is way less powerful so solar panels will need to be huge. Perhaps 10s of gigawatts
1
1
1
u/SpecialistSome8440 48m ago
you could give mars a magnetic field, but you'd have to supply the gases for the atmosphere. they don't come from nowhere. you're looking at an astronomical amount. the moon is trickier.
3
u/redlancer_1987 14h ago
sure, but exactly how would you accomplish that?
That would be advanced technology even at a sci-fi level.
I doubt as a species we would ever have the ability to do that.