Re: Life on Venus is absolute hell, but doable

From: Stullia (conc_at_usa.net)
Date: 02/02/05 

Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 19:00:15 +0300

Very interesting discussion.
The problem is: what's life. Can be life on the Sun? I think there is.
You are talking about possibility to survive of Earth forms on Venus.

I may talk of my view of evolution: it's a nature of our world. I think so
after 10 years of solving different engineering tasks with genetic
algorithms
(some results you may see at http://stullia.t-k.ru ).

Life is unlimited in space, time, temperature and pressure. Do you know
about unexplained radioactivity of Jupiter? Yet we have only one probe in
it's atmosphere about 10 years ago.

And what we know about Mars? It's interesting: most attempts to reach Mars
failed (each seemed true-but how do you explain lost of very expensive craft
because no ignition on Earth's orbit, yet we have enough experience in this
field).

Different problem: Mars's sphincs. It disappeared, and we told that it was
something like mistake. 10 or 15 years difference between two pictures
showed two different objects, how it can change so fast. Maybe we see what
they transmit?

It's history, but at the end of 80's two Russian probes started on the way
to Mars. Sure some 15 years ago we didn't have good computers. So one probe
was frozen by incorrect command in machine code from the Earth (No sun-no
electricity).
Main probe has several probes to jump on Fobos. Second alive suddenly lost
battery power reaching Mars orbit (it was on orbit, trying to reach Fobos)
and lost possibility to use main transmitter. The last view it send was an
cylindrical object reaching the craft. After that probe was lost.
It's not fantasy, well informed Mr.Sagdeev, director of the program in
Russia, now living in USA.

And at last in addition:
Moon module in 1969 has 42 Kb memory to operate engines to land. It's
impossible for a man to operate in 3 dimensions (he has joystick and has
about 40 seconds to choose landing site). While going down without engines
computer hang (in Windows now it's blue screen)-what to do? Red button-start
to McColins, never Moon. Huston-reload computer-you still falling
down-Armstrong-reload-O'K-Landing-"Eagle has landed"-I heard it in real time
those days by direct radio.

I am sorry to be long, but hope it was interesting. Most members of Loon
expedions were lost. Why?

"Brad Guth" <bradguth@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ea9ad81020ecd2e8b3f6cf500a856522.49644@mygate.mailgate.org...
> Thanks for your honest interest, even if it's a wee bit on the side of
> being critical. I hope this revised reply is somewhat more readable, as
> I do seem to have an ongoing dyslexic complication, not to mention
> having to deal with all of the favor returning on behalf of what the
> mainstream has been attempting to accomplish in spite of all the facts
> that I seem to be having more than my fair share of difficulty getting
> across.
>
> josephus; "Do yu thnk life could survive in a a kiln?"
>
> The latest generation of AI/robotic machines have become most certainly
> capable of surviving Venus, at least at full capacity while operating
> within 811°K has become an established fact, just as humans surviving
> quite nicely at 68 bar and upon 1% O2 and 99% H2 is fully established as
> being survivable, and I'm not even all that certain as to the
> temperature at which blood boils while at 90 bar.
>
> Minature vacuum tube and essentially hard-wired circuitry is certainly
> good for 811°K, if not hotter. Electro-mechanicals of solenoids, motors
> and generators are somewhat off the shalf these days. I believe the
> elevated nighttime environment of Venus could be as slight as 600°K, and
> of extreme sothern/northern terratories even cooler, especially the
> Istar Terra that's offering a major zone elevated some 10+km.
>
> Technically even life as we know it, as dumb and dumber and thereby as
> easily dumbfounded and snookered as we've become, even this daunting
> challenge can be accommodated by way of applied technology. However, why
> bother or much less risk physically setting an extremely spendy hot-foot
> upon Venus if suitable interactive surface probes can relay whatever
> without any chance of our DNA getting roasted?
>
> Thus the answer has been a resounding YES as to machines as well as man
> surviving within a kiln. At least within an R-1024/m insulated
> reverse-kiln that's efficiently keeping the mostly conductive form of
> heat out, and of a reverse-kiln that's got access to unlimited energy
> and that fairly nifty ocean of mostly CO2 that's offering a perfectly
> good alternative for freon, except that you can efficiently utilize a
> single-pass process of compressing, heat-exchanging and evaporating
> since there's no good reason as to recirculate the spent CO2 that's
> utilized for air-conditioning. Certainly the process of CO2-->CO/O2
> isn't going to represent any problem that I can think of. But, what's
> important is what do you think?
>
> Those upcoming ESA/Russian missions to Venus need only to employ a new
> and improved radar imaging capability of obtaining 10 m/pixel from
> orbit, of which this much should have been easily doable. It would be
> somewhat nicer if the mission orbit was established a bit less
> elliptical so that the northern and southern territories are obtained at
> the 10 m/pixel, and it obviously would be even nicer yet if those pixels
> were of 16 bit instead of the Magellan 8 bit format. Their
> lander/probe(s) needs only as little as 1% of the internal energy
> demands of their previous probes, and there's certainly no technical
> reason as to why existing circuitry (miniature vacuum tube if need be)
> and energy source can't be configured as to sustain itself at 811°K. A
> relatively small balloon/craft by volume should carry their descending
> phase along for days before selectively deciding where to shoot for an
> actual landing. There's way more than sufficient nighttime illumination
> of the 400~450 nm spectrum that'll light up the nighttime season of
> Venus from starshine and earthshine, being just fine and dandy as for
> the sorts of nocturnal eyes and nightvision cameras, and/or of efficient
> radar imaging that doesn't need a pico lumen to see by. Aerodynamics has
> always been there for the taking, with 65+kg/m3 to boot, whereas an
> h2o2/c12h26 powered robotic airship like craft (possibly an IRRCE
> turboprop driven rigid airship) would offer an extremely energy
> efficient and thereby enable a controlled and entirely selective landing
> at the GUTH Venus interplanetary tarmac (how good is that?).
>
> I would have liked to have seen a TRACE-II established at Venus L2. That
> way all sorts of perfectly good information can be efficiently obtained
> and relayed to/from whatever interactive surface instruments, possibly
> via laser transceiving (thus a quantum packet stream of 1e12 bps becomes
> doable) and then by way of our having to use the traditional inefficient
> microwave methods of sharing such data to/from Earth. Of course the
> TRACE-II team would be multi-tasking on behalf of continuing their
> mission of researching of our sun, except for having a better
> perspective than ever possible by the original TRACE instrument that's
> somewhat out-dated and about to go off-line due to old age.
>
> Regards, Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
>
>
> "josephus" <dogbird@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:A0PLd.3426$Nn1.2723@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net
>
> >
> >
> > Brad Guth wrote:
> >
> > > Good Christ almighty folks; if this sort of topic about the hot and
> > > nasty prospects of other life surviving upon Venus, if this isn't even
> > > sufficiently 'sci.skeptic' qualified, then what the heck is?
> > >
> > > Regards, Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
> > >
> > >
> > I doubt it though. None of our probes has lasted long enough to look
> > around. Life may be more resilliant than a machine, but if the machine
> > cant survive, there is little hope for life in that condition. sort of
> > looking for life in the enviromental equivalent of a furnace. Do yu
> > thnk life could survive in a a kiln? there are limits to everything
> >
> > Terraforming would be necessary, but noone know how it could be done and
> > the current ideas would take 100000 years.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG