Slashdot Mirror


The Sierras of Titan

eldavojohn writes "Cassini has detected the tallest mountains on Titan, a large moon of Saturn. More importantly, clouds have also been detected in Titan's atmosphere. Why is this news important? Well, as scientists scan the skies for the easiest piece of mass to colonize, things that resemble Earth's geology & atmosphere are going to require the least effort & resources. These mountains mean that Titan may have tectonic plate movement similar in some ways to earth's. From the article, '"You can think of Titan as the Earth in deep freeze," said Dr Rosaly Lopes, Cassini radar team member at the US space agency's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. "It has a lot of the geological processes that Earth has. In fact, it is more Earth-like than anywhere else in the Solar System. But the surface is very cold; it's about minus 178C."'"

167 comments

  1. Kurt Vonnegut Jr. by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I titled this article "The Sierras of Titan" as a pun for Kurt Vonnegut Jr.'s early sci-fi novel 'The Sirens of Titan." The book means a lot to me so I heavily recommend it but before you mod me offtopic, let me explain why Vonnegut picked Titan, of all the mass in the galaxy.

    There have been experiments on the abundant chemicals on Titan done by astronautical & nuclear engineer Robert Zubrin who has been quite influential in the proliferation of humans to other pieces of mass ASAP.

    While you may be able to argue that these experiments were too early or had inherent flaws within them, they were done to try to prove that a "chemical revolution" could occur on Titan similar to what we theorize happened on earth early on. I haven't heard many people address the fact that it could have taken billion of years to progress on earth but I am quite interested to see if there is a way to engineer bacteria to break methane down into oxygen or some other gas that we could potentially exploit to make oxygen.

    As you may have seen in other media, Titan is often used because of these experiments. It's a bit of a romantic dream but these mountains are just a little more to add to the possibility.

    Oh, I also forgot to include a link to the Cassini-Huygens mission which has images, videos, wallpapers and all that jazz of Titan and its mountains.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Kurt Vonnegut Jr. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We all know that the mountains were formed because Kazak just started eating the landscape

    2. Re:Kurt Vonnegut Jr. by DerekLyons · · Score: 1
      There have been experiments on the abundant chemicals on Titan done by astronautical & nuclear engineer Robert Zubrin who has been quite influential in the proliferation of humans to other pieces of mass ASAP.

      Unhappily, the long term effects of his 'influence' have been mostly negative. It doesn't take long for most people to figure out that he's an egotistical asshole whose 'science' consists mostly of handwaving, vague and incomplete analysis, and wishful thinking.
    3. Re:Kurt Vonnegut Jr. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you care to back that ad hominem attack with some facts? Lots of people have called visionaries similar things.. until someone *really* tries to apply their principles (in Zubin's case, a good experiement would be sending probes to automatically extract raw materials and fuel from the Mars land environment in preparation for his 'Mars Direct' missions), one can't really dismiss him that easily.

      He may be a crank, or not -- but I haven't heard anyone at NASA really say he's out to lunch. Who are you to say? Show us some facts, bud.

    4. Re:Kurt Vonnegut Jr. by vought · · Score: 1

      "Sierras" is not a word - at best, it's Englishified Spanish, often used by those who don't understand what they're talking about.

      TFA refers to a range of mountains on Titan. The correct usage would be Sierra, the term for a range of mountains in Spanish.

      As a photographer and snow sports person, this is a just a simple pet peeve, but the usage is exanding, and for those who know what Sierra means, "Sierras" grates on the ears. Sierra is already plural in Spanish - no need to add an s.

    5. Re:Kurt Vonnegut Jr. by geobeck · · Score: 1

      ...Robert Zubrin who has been quite influential in the proliferation of humans to other pieces of mass...

      I wholeheartedly endorse Robert Zubrin's goals. In fact, I take every opportunity to proliferate myself to other pieces of...

      Oh, wait a minute. Didn't see the 'm'. Never mind.

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    6. Re:Kurt Vonnegut Jr. by barakn · · Score: 1
      I am quite interested to see if there is a way to engineer bacteria to break methane down into oxygen or some other gas that we could potentially exploit to make oxygen.
      I'd be very interested to see if there's a way to engineer bacteria to perform nuclear reactions too, but it's not going to happen.
      --
      "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
    7. Re:Kurt Vonnegut Jr. by edbarbar · · Score: 1

      Methane = CH4, which means no oxygen.

      Science is not about fanciful thinking.

      Nor is it about doubling down on the MARs failure (no life on mars, let's look to titan next).

      --
      Ed Barbar, President and General Manager, Furnit USA
    8. Re:Kurt Vonnegut Jr. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's a "huan"?

  2. A long drive by t00le · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can only imagine my son kicking the back of my chair for 6 years on the flight there....

    --
    When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail
  3. So... by gt_mattex · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...it's warmer than mid-winter Minnesota then?

    --
    "No doubt one may quote history to support any cause, as the devil quotes scripture." - Learned Hand
    1. Re:So... by __aawdrj2992 · · Score: 0

      Current temp here is about 50 degrees Farenheit. I'm wearing a T-Shirt.

    2. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      well, its certainly warmer than my ex's heart ...

      ... and the captcha is "frozen"

    3. Re:So... by chrismcdirty · · Score: 1

      Technically, it's currently late autumn. Good luck with that t-shirt in late January/early February.

      --
      It's like sex, except I'm having it!
    4. Re:So... by glenstar · · Score: 1
      Explain that to a 5 year old! I caught myself by surprise this morning by being a pedantic fuck when my son said something about "it is cold this winter". I replied "Actually, winter is not for another couple of days." He stared at me, as only the spoils of your loins can, with a look that said "you, dada, are a complete dumbfuck."

      Ah... parenthood.

    5. Re:So... by Laur · · Score: 1
      I caught myself by surprise this morning by being a pedantic fuck when my son said something about "it is cold this winter". I replied "Actually, winter is not for another couple of days." He stared at me, as only the spoils of your loins can, with a look that said "you, dada, are a complete dumbfuck."
      December 22nd is the Winter Solstice, which is actually mid-winter, not the beginning of winter. I can't figure out why the US mistakenly calls this the beginning of winter, other then the fact that it is a nice, measurable event.
      --
      When you lose something irreplaceable, you don't mourn for the thing you lost, you mourn for yourself. - Harpo Marx
    6. Re:So... by strstrep · · Score: 1

      It's because the hottest and coldest days of the year do not correspond with the solstices. Local temperatures have state, and it takes a while to heat and cool the atmosphere, surface, and oceans.

    7. Re:So... by Laur · · Score: 1
      It's because the hottest and coldest days of the year do not correspond with the solstices. Local temperatures have state, and it takes a while to heat and cool the atmosphere, surface, and oceans.
      Who mentioned weather? The definition of the seasons has nothing to do with weather, it is purely astronomical. Try reading the Bad Astronomer's take on this.
      --
      When you lose something irreplaceable, you don't mourn for the thing you lost, you mourn for yourself. - Harpo Marx
  4. Water Ice by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... But Titan's crust is made out of water ice. If you were to take it out of the deep-freeze and bring it to a comfortable, Earth-like temperature - it would melt.

    While surface features may be analogous to those found here on Earth, they're made out of entirely different things...

    --
    Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    1. Re:Water Ice by stevesliva · · Score: 1
      ... But Titan's crust is made out of water ice. If you were to take it out of the deep-freeze and bring it to a comfortable, Earth-like temperature - it would melt.
      Seriously. One wonders if the only requirements for being defined as "most earthlike" were liquid precipitation and active alluvial erosion.
      --
      Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
  5. Cold you say? Why thats nothing by arcite · · Score: 4, Funny

    Send the Canadians to Colonize. I used to live in Northern Canada and walked to school in -30C weather with a -40C windchill --uphill and in the dark! Titan should be a cake-walk. Just make sure to send lots of beer and women to uhhhh compensate.

    1. Re:Cold you say? Why thats nothing by StupidMBA · · Score: 3, Funny
      ...--uphill and in the dark!

      Big deal! You only had to that one way. Try doing that going uphill both ways!

      --
      Don't mod me down: I was joking!
    2. Re:Cold you say? Why thats nothing by Unlucke · · Score: 1

      ...--uphill and in the dark!

      Big deal! You only had to that one way. Try doing that going uphill both ways!

      with no shoes!
    3. Re:Cold you say? Why thats nothing by dieselweasel · · Score: 1

      And that was in the summer.

    4. Re:Cold you say? Why thats nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see it was a warm spell that year.

    5. Re:Cold you say? Why thats nothing by Patrik_AKA_RedX · · Score: 1

      No shoes? ah! luxury! We didn't had pants. Cold feet is nothing. Snowballs on the other hand.

    6. Re:Cold you say? Why thats nothing by Alzheimers · · Score: 1

      You had feet?

  6. A Proposition by Who235 · · Score: 1

    I think we should name them the Kazak Mountains.

    Or the Winston Range.

    1. Re:A Proposition by edmicman · · Score: 1

      My vote goes to the Colbert Mountains

    2. Re:A Proposition by NiteShaed · · Score: 1

      That'll be real nice, once we get some steagles to nest there......

      --
      Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
  7. Cold, and HOT too, right? by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The cold isn't the only thing that would-be colonists would be facing, right? Don't the gas giants have some helacious radiation belts? I seem to recall that Titan is sitting right in the middle of one, too. Perhaps a pro can chime in on that. Sure, we could warm up a nice little ice cave and whatnot, but would all that ice also be a worthy shield against the EM nastiness?

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    1. Re:Cold, and HOT too, right? by khallow · · Score: 1

      You also have Titan's atmosphere. It's denser than Earth's atmosphere. That should be enough, me thinks.

  8. I See.... by kid_oliva · · Score: 1, Funny

    so now we no what Hell freezing over will be like. Come to Titan... where your mother-in-law will actually like you!!!

    --
    I eat Karma for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. That's why I don't have any.
  9. Not a good place to colonize by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Titan is not a good place to colonize because it is cold.... cold, cold, cold. Not only would you have to keep your colony on Xanadu warm from the cold, but you'd have to keep your warmth in or you would melt through the surface (which is 'rocks' made up of water ice). When Huygens landed it evaporated a cloud of frozen methane just from its measly heat... a whole colony would probably touch off a cryovolcano eruption.

    Titan isn't a good place to live, but it is an awesome place to explore. Imagine a hot air balloon flying over these mountains and the lakes and rivers and the giant sand dune seas. Without UV from the sun to degrade the balloon's envelope and with plutonium to heat up the air inside such a balloon could last pretty much forever.... or at least until the plutonium is used up.

    --
    There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
    1. Re:Not a good place to colonize by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Interesting
      you would melt through the surface (which is 'rocks' made up of water ice).

      Two possible solutions:

      (1) restrict the inside of the colony to 0C. Not unthinkable - keep in mind that the native peoples of the Arctic used to live in ice houses. Place a nuclear reactor on stilts on top of the ice layer and transmit power to the colony using electricity or even insulated steam piping.

      (2) how deep is the ice layer? Melt through and place the colony either in a pit or at the bottom of a columnar artificial lake with an access tunnel to the surface.

      -b.

    2. Re:Not a good place to colonize by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 1

      You can insulate things so that the rate of heat loss is the same as the rate of heat that can be taken away by the wind. Effectively spreading your warmth over the whole planet and not just on the part under you. Still, this is not an easy thing to do.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
    3. Re:Not a good place to colonize by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1

      I agree with you compltely. To expand I also take issue with this sentace in the origianl story submission:
      things that resemble Earth's geology & atmosphere are going to require the least effort & resources.
      I'm sorry butif Titan has an Earth like geology wouldn't that make it a reason to avoid it. If it has quakes like Earth then you have to worry about making your colony survive those two. And if teh atmosphere is not friendly to humans (it's not) then getting a crack in your building is going to be even worse than it would on Earth.

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    4. Re:Not a good place to colonize by ryanvm · · Score: 1

      you'd have to keep your warmth in or you would melt through the surface (which is 'rocks' made up of water ice).

      Man, just imagine the global warming FUD you'd have to put up with in a Titanese colony...

      [So long karma.]

    5. Re:Not a good place to colonize by MORTAR_COMBAT! · · Score: 1

      > Man, just imagine the global warming FUD you'd have to put up with in a Titanese colony...

      "People of Titan: if we do not change things, in another nearly 200 degrees Celsius, we're going to have a major problem."

      --
      MORTAR COMBAT!
    6. Re:Not a good place to colonize by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

      0C isn't enough. There's large amounts of other frozen hydrocarbons in the soil as well.

      The Earth analog -- a simpler challenge, but a challenge nonetheless -- is permafrost. If you build a house on the ground in many parts of Alaska, your foundation will crack as you slowly melt the permafrost beneath you. One solution is to build the house on stilts to leave an airspace beneath you. A more extreme option is used by the trans-alaska pipeline, which has heated fluids moving through it. Parts of the pipine are supported by columns that contain ammonia and extend into the permafrost. In the summer, the permafrost loses heat as usual, but in the winter, they get a cycle of ammonia boiling off in the permafrost, rising, cooling on the radiators, and descending to chill the permafrost down. They basically store up their summer heat during the winter.

      Oh, and the ice on Titan is extremely deep. Much of the planet, actually.

      --
      If a tree falls in the forest and no engineer observes it, does it have a drag coefficient?
    7. Re:Not a good place to colonize by Rei · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I saw a review of proposed methods to explore Titan. They considered balloons (not hot air -- helium. Keeping air hot would use too much energy), blimps, helicopters, fixed-wing aircraft, and non-fixed wing aircraft. Power was assumed to be from an RTG (radiothermal generator). Balloons were cheapest, but gave you no control over your route. Blimps were next cheapest and gave you route control, but were still very slow. Helicopters gave you fast movement, and were seen as an attractive propsect. They cannot stay aloft all the time, but simply fly for a few hours, land, and study the surface/communicate with Earth while the RTGs recharge their flight batteries. Fixed-wing aircraft were argued against because they would be subject to the same constraints, but couldn't land safely. Non-fixed wing aircraft were seen as the best, although most expensive, option. They can land safely for recharging like a helicopter, but can move at much higher speeds, thus allowing the probe to cover more ground.

      One thing noted for all landings was that they would essentially have to be autonomous. You don't have the luxury of having a human review landing sites because the latency is too long for the vehicle to wait for you to tell it where to go. So, it will involve software that picks terrain features that look "interesting". Humans can tell it which way to go when it leaves next, and modify its priorities for what it views as "interesting", but the actual choice will be up to the craft.

      I can't wait to see a mission like this get underway. :)

      --
      If a tree falls in the forest and no engineer observes it, does it have a drag coefficient?
    8. Re:Not a good place to colonize by pclminion · · Score: 1

      Not only would you have to keep your colony on Xanadu warm from the cold, but you'd have to keep your warmth in or you would melt through the surface

      What's the big deal? Build your colony on huge stilts to keep it physically separated from the surface.

    9. Re:Not a good place to colonize by hoojus · · Score: 1

      Ahh but we can warm it up with our great global warming skills. Just put a few SUVs on it and it will be like a balmy equatorial colony.

    10. Re:Not a good place to colonize by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 1

      They considered balloons (not hot air -- helium. Keeping air hot would use too much energy), blimps, helicopters, fixed-wing aircraft, and non-fixed wing aircraft. Power was assumed to be from an RTG (radiothermal generator).

      If you're using an RTG for power, why not just use the waste heat to make your hot air? RTG's produce way more heat than power (they aren't very efficient)

      --
      There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
    11. Re:Not a good place to colonize by thc69 · · Score: 1

      Don't forget to fire off a few aerosol cans powered by CFCs...that'll warm the place right up.

      Actually, I'm really enjoying this global warming. Summer was mild here in the northeast USA, and we're halfway through december and have only seen a few days of freezing weather. Sweet!

      --
      Procrastination -- because good things come to those who wait.
    12. Re:Not a good place to colonize by nahdude812 · · Score: 1

      Couldn't you account for the melting in the design of your colony? Design it to float? Maybe even design it to have large braces which extend through the molten area surrounding it and into the solid ice beyond for stability. If there were no currents in the molten water around your colony, this could even act as its own form of insulation. Put a cover over it to keep any interference from the atmosphere, and even add heat pump over your lake to help maintain it at the right temperature (reclaiming excess heat from the lake).

    13. Re:Not a good place to colonize by Rei · · Score: 1

      The issue is surface area. A hot air balloon has a lot of surface area to lose heat through. The RTG just can't keep up. They don't produce heat that quickly.

      --
      If a tree falls in the forest and no engineer observes it, does it have a drag coefficient?
    14. Re:Not a good place to colonize by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 1

      A hot air balloon is one of NASA's leading concepts for future exploration of Titan. I've seen talks and posters on the concept from JPL and Goddard at OPAG and the DPS meeting a couple months ago. Heat loss through the envelope is not an issue, an MMRTG like on MSL would provide plenty of heat. The biggest issue is designing an envelope to withstand the extreme cold. Remember high school science demos where they put rubber in liquid nitrogen.... Titan is so cold, nitrogen is solid on the surface. So it is hard (but not impossible) to find materials that would work for balloons and blimps at such low temperatures.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
    15. Re:Not a good place to colonize by Rei · · Score: 1

      Are you talking about the Aerover Blimp, one of the leading candidates for exploration? That's helium-based, not hot air based. Hmm, let's google.

      Ah! I found a reference to an OPAG presentation on the "Titan Montgolfiere" (uck, I hate that name), which is proposed to be hot air based. Is this what you were referring to? Apparently when the heat requirement (2000 watts) was presented, people whistled in amazement (although this is heat, not electricity, which is easier). On may 6, 2006, Emily Lakdawalla described it as still being in the "pie in the sky" stages (the Aerover prototype has already been built and tested at 93K). I'm curious how 2000 watts could even cut it; hot air balloons on Earth take hundreds of thousands of watts. (searching for the paper). Part of it is due to the increased buoyancy, which I'd expect, and obviously there's a lot less radiative heat transfer (which is proportional to the fourth power), but I'm surprised that convection would be significantly lower, given Titan's higher atmospheric density. I'd be curious to know how they arrive at that... I don't see any calculations, unfortunately. :P Oh well.

      Thanks for the info. :)

      --
      If a tree falls in the forest and no engineer observes it, does it have a drag coefficient?
    16. Re:Not a good place to colonize by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 1

      The Montgolfiere is the JPL concept... I was at the OPAG presentation a no one whistled. I also saw a poster on a Goddard hot air balloon at the DPS. As far as I know, both studies are going forward (with substantial funding). I am unaware of any current work on helium blimps at JPL or Goddard.... Since you have to carry an RTG, you're going to have a lot of waste heat which makes hot air a logical choice - if it works. No need to worry about running out of gass, and a much simpler way to control altitude. And I have no reason to doubt the feasibility studies done independantly at both JPL and Goddard, so I think it is feasible.

      As for 'pie in the sky', the analysis presented at OPAG seemed no more pie in the sky to me than a Europa mission which is the current plan for JPL's next flagship. And it seemed considerably less 'pie in the sky' than JIMO.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
    17. Re:Not a good place to colonize by Rei · · Score: 1

      On both the whistling and the quote, I'm just quoting the Planetary Society's reporter, Emily Lackdawalla. Don't get mad at me for quoting someone who saw a presentation on it and is certainly qualified to comment.

      --
      If a tree falls in the forest and no engineer observes it, does it have a drag coefficient?
    18. Re:Not a good place to colonize by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 1

      I'm not mad... sorry if I messed up on the 'email tone' I just meant to respond to your post. Emily is entitled to her opinion, but I don't agree with what she wrote.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
  10. Resembles Earth? No way! by khallow · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why is this news important? Well, as scientists scan the skies for the easiest piece of mass to colonize, things that resemble Earth's geology & atmosphere are going to require the least effort & resources.

    Titan's atmosphere and general environment doesn't resemble Earth in the least. Hence, this sentence makes no sense. We've already found the few pieces places that are easiest to terraform, namely Mars, Venus, and perhaps Europa. Anything in orbit around Saturn won't qualify as "easiest", just because of temperature and energy flux from the Sun. You would need to find a long term energy source to heat the moon up to temperatures at which liquid water exists and and to enable photosynthesis . Either Titan gets moved or you make a local energy source. Terraforming the Moon is probably as easy.

    Also, implied is confusion between colonization and terraforming. People can settle Titan, but they probably aren't going to make it Earth-like. In which case, any plate techtonics and geological activity may be very undesirable.
    1. Re:Resembles Earth? No way! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Titan sucks for temperature but has the right atmospheric pressure. Lets say that gives it score of 1/2. How do your other options score for colonization? (And because you're confused let me be clear: for *colonization*, not terraforming).

    2. Re:Resembles Earth? No way! by CorSci81 · · Score: 1

      Actually, Titan's atmosphere is the most similar to Earth's of any body in the solar system. Titan is the only other body in the solar system with an atmosphere primarily composed of nitrogen (around 80-90%) and with a similar pressure (1.5 bar to our 1 bar). It just happens to be really really cold there.

    3. Re:Resembles Earth? No way! by khallow · · Score: 1

      I don't consider atmospheric pressure that useful. But let's see. It has the four basic elements: hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen, all in what I'd consider abundance. It's too far away from the Sun to get useful solar power. Surface gravity is slightly weaker than the Moon, but it has a higher escape velocity (because it is less dense, but more massive than the Moon). It'll be a long way from the rest of civilization (both in terms of orbital dynamics and by light-speed communication). That means it'll remain on the periphery for a considerable time after it is first colonized.

      My take is that plentiful nitrogen in a modest gravity well will drive early Titan colonization. But temperature and no solar power is the real obstruction.
    4. Re:Resembles Earth? No way! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Atmospheric pressure is *extremely* useful: it dictates how thick the walls of the habitable compound have to be, and how much structural reinforcement is needed. If the pressure on Titan is livable, then you could almost get away with a wireframe dome covered with Saran Wrap.

    5. Re:Resembles Earth? No way! by khallow · · Score: 1

      It'll need thick insulation for anything, including people and agriculture, that can't take the cold. And for ground-based buildings you'll need a lot of some sort of insulating support structure to keep from melting down into the bedrock. I don't think anything is gained with the dense atmosphere.

    6. Re:Resembles Earth? No way! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give it 5-10 billion years and see whether Earth or Titan is more comfortable.

    7. Re:Resembles Earth? No way! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure where you get your intuition from. Half-an-inch of styrofoam is enough to insulate liquid nitrogen. On the other hand, if you have a thin atmosphere buildings will have to be as bulky as the International Space Station.

    8. Re:Resembles Earth? No way! by khallow · · Score: 1

      The Genesis I prototype space station has a six inch thick skin, most of which is there to protect against micrometeorites. So it need not be that bulky. The overpressure inside the station provides most of the structural integrity.

      Second, I calculate that a centimeter thick layer of silica aerogel with a 200K drop in temperature would leak around 60 watts per square meter. Not bad, if the volume enclosed generates enough heat. But the aerogel layer will need protection from damage. So I really don't see much difference in the protective skins of the two environments. OTOH, thermal contact with the ground is very serious. Some things will melt or vaporize if they are heated enough. A thin layer doesn't strike me as being sufficient protection. IMHO, 60W/m^2 into the ground would be dangerous since that could create liquid and gas pockets under the station and undermine the stability of the station. As far as I can tell, almost nothing on the surface of Titan would remain solid at room temperature.
    9. Re:Resembles Earth? No way! by Jarnin · · Score: 1

      We've already found the few pieces places that are easiest to terraform, namely Mars, Venus, and perhaps Europa.

      Terraforming Mars is by far the easiest on your list. If it has a decent amount of water under the surface, we could probably terraform in hundreds or perhaps thousands of years.

      Venus will prove to be the toughest on your list, simply due to it's dense atmosphere, lack of water, and its rotation. If we had the technology to build a massive solar shade and place it in the L1 position between it and the sun, we could freeze the atmosphere into dry ice which would snow to the surface. That leaves the lack of water and rotation.
      I've heard some folks talk about dragging comets and smashing them into the surface on an angle to speed up Venus' rotation and add water and other volatiles, but that would require a massive amount of time and effort. I imagine "terraforming" Venus would take thousands to tens of thousands of years.

      Europa cannot be terraformed in the traditional sense. With the radiation Jupiter spits out, living on the surface would be a waste of time and effort. The only way to survive long-term on Europa would be to colonize the oceans beneath the surface ice. So you have ocean colonies, not terraformation.

      I think the most interesting part about all this talk of terraforming other worlds is that we only live on one-quarter of our planet. The oceans are nearly devoid of human life. Here's a thought: How about we move into underwater habitats and work on colonizing the rest of our planet before we get all excited about other planets?

    10. Re:Resembles Earth? No way! by khallow · · Score: 1

      I have a pretty liberal definition of "terraforming", namely to make something more livable for either humans or life in general. But it's not worth pushing my interpretation over others. But IMHO building underwater colonies, whether it be on Earth or Europa would be a valid example of terraforming.

      I think the most interesting part about all this talk of terraforming other worlds is that we only live on one-quarter of our planet. The oceans are nearly devoid of human life. Here's a thought: How about we move into underwater habitats and work on colonizing the rest of our planet before we get all excited about other planets?

      This is a very interesting point. Why don't people try to live in these regions?
  11. Ice mountains by bkg_cjb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Right, there are mountains...ice mountains, not rock. I don't see what this "similarity" does for humans.

  12. Well, there went MY idea.... by StressGuy · · Score: 2, Funny

    I was going to suggest that we simply move Titan closer to the sun...you know...with a rocket or something

    --
    A goal is a dream with a deadline
    1. Re:Well, there went MY idea.... by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      The perfect solution of what to do with SUV drivers! Let them tool around Titan causing it to warm considerably*, the fires they cause when they inevitably get into accidents will only help! Then the rest of us who don't drive behemoth resource guzzling vehicles can continue to live in peace.

      *I know this isn't how global warming works, it's a joke :P

    2. Re:Well, there went MY idea.... by Rei · · Score: 1

      And Titan is only.. you know... 134,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 (134.5 septillion) kilograms in mass.

      --
      If a tree falls in the forest and no engineer observes it, does it have a drag coefficient?
    3. Re:Well, there went MY idea.... by Rei · · Score: 1

      Er, correction: sextillion. Miscounted my zeroes. :)

      --
      If a tree falls in the forest and no engineer observes it, does it have a drag coefficient?
    4. Re:Well, there went MY idea.... by jdray · · Score: 1

      Aw, what's a few orders of magnitude between friends? ;^)

      --
      The Spoon
      Updated 6/28/2011
  13. Heating by coldtone · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well If there is one thing humans can do, it's heat up a planet!

    1. Re:Heating by TheQuantumShift · · Score: 1

      Well that solves the NASA funding quandry... Just get the big SUV makers to sponser it, and we can all pile into the first space-hummer off this rock.

      --

      Shift happens. Fire it up.
  14. As they say in the pacific northwest by truckaxle · · Score: 1

    Earth First... We will log the other planets later. It may be true eh?

  15. Cold? No problem! by milimetric · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hey, global warming is what we're good at people. Lets attach a big heat tube from the earth to Titan.

  16. Antarctica is a lot warmer by mi · · Score: 4, Insightful
    But the surface is very cold; it's about minus 178C.

    It is a lot warmer in Antarctica and the easy-to-reach place has plenty of oxygen and water. If we really are running out of room, the continent should be colonized first...

    Heck, if the "Global Warming" fear-mongering is even partially true, the continent will only become better — and it already is much better than any extra-terrestrial body.

    That no settlements (as in "villages", not science labs) exist even on this much more habitable place is just a sign, how far off space colonization really is... I think, some South America's country(ies) tried to pay people to live there (just to claim territory, pretty much), but it still failed...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Antarctica is a lot warmer by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      IT's also protected by treaty.
      And having the area around you melt away why trying to ahve a regular town is not a good thing.
      Yes I KNOW there is land undernither, I'm talking about the ice bits.

      Putting humans off planet help give a chance for the species to survive and thrive.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Antarctica is a lot warmer by chrismcdirty · · Score: 1

      It's not so much that we're running out of room. It's that the the process of making Antarctica more hospitable will raise sea levels, effectively destroying coastlines the world over.

      --
      It's like sex, except I'm having it!
    3. Re:Antarctica is a lot warmer by DerekLyons · · Score: 1
      That no settlements (as in "villages", not science labs) exist even on this much more habitable place is just a sign, how far off space colonization really is...

      IT's also protected by treaty.

      Even before it was protected by treaty there was no great rush by people to settle there. It's simply too inhospitable.
    4. Re:Antarctica is a lot warmer by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      No one would move to Titan for the space. The reason for colonization of Titan is 1) to establish a base in the Saturn system and 2) to facilitate mining the bodies in the Saturn system for natural resources, especially H3 (used in fusion).

      It's the same reason people live in ugly mining towns; not because it's a nice place to live, but because there's a paycheck.

      For the forseeable future, colonization of other planets and moons won't be for the purpose of spreading large numbers of humans across the solar system as an insurance policy. It'll be for the purposes of scientific exploration and gathering of natural resources. It'll probably be quite some time before any planet can be modified so that large numbers of people actually want to move there permanently. Doing this would require actually changing the atmosphere to make it breatheable by humans, and changing the temperature so people can actually survive without living their whole lives inside artificial structures. The type of colonization we're talking about here just requires some relatively small habitat modules for people to live in and work in for a while until their shift is over and they go home, not changing atmospheres to be earth-like.

    5. Re:Antarctica is a lot warmer by salimma · · Score: 1
      And having the area around you melt away why trying to ahve a regular town is not a good thing. Yes I KNOW there is land undernither, I'm talking about the ice bits.


      Considering the ice cap is on average ~2,000m thick, having it melting underneath you is a *very bad* thing. Especially since the land underneath most accessible parts of Antarctica would be under water if the ice melts, so you either gradually move the settlements inland or build it far in from the start and suffer the logistical problems.
      --
      Michel
      Fedora Project Contribut
    6. Re:Antarctica is a lot warmer by qazsedcft · · Score: 1

      IT's also protected by treaty.

      Outer space is also protected by treaty. Treaties are going to become pretty useless when there will be no more land to settle.

    7. Re:Antarctica is a lot warmer by qazsedcft · · Score: 1
      People like to fantasize about colonizing outer space but the reality is that we're still far from needing to colonize other planets. If land were lacking our most likely options are (in order of priority):

      • Expand existing cities outwards, up in the sky, and below the ground
      • Northern Canada, Siberia, Australia, various deserts and plains
      • Oceans, Antarctica, high mountains
      • Moon
      • Mars
      • Outer space
  17. No radiaiton at Saturn by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 4, Informative

    Saturn's rings effectively neutralize most radiation at Saturn... it's not much of a hazard at all. What little radiation there is wouldn't get through Titan's atmosphere anyway.

    The only two planets with substantial radiation belts are Jupiter and Earth (i.e. the Van Allen belts). At Jupiter Io and Europa are in the belts, Callisto is too far out, and Ganymede has its own magnetic field that would protect spacecraft near it from the radiation.

    BTW, the sort of radiation in these belts are electrons and energetic ions of regular stuff like Hydrogen and Oxygen. Not neutrons.... which makes it a little easier to protect against.

    --
    There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
  18. All these worlds are yours... by thedaven · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Except Europa

    1. Re:All these worlds are yours... by danpsmith · · Score: 1
      Except Europa

      Huh? Sorry, I'm not into Pokemon.

      --
      Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
    2. Re:All these worlds are yours... by boldtbanan · · Score: 3, Funny
      Huh? Sorry, I'm not into Pokemon.
      or Arthur C. Clarke apparently.
    3. Re:All these worlds are yours... by HiredMan · · Score: 1

      We were only the tenants of this world. We have been given a new lease, and a warning, from the landlord.

    4. Re:All these worlds are yours... by kindbud · · Score: 1

      stfu

      --
      Edith Keeler Must Die
  19. not gonna work by blurker · · Score: 4, Funny

    We need all the tubes we've got to build the internets out of...

    1. Re:not gonna work by ricree · · Score: 1

      I suppose we could always switch over to trucks. Then we'd have plenty of tubes to go around.

  20. One of the worst story summaries ever by amightywind · · Score: 1
    More importantly, clouds have also been detected in Titan's atmosphere.

    Wow! We have only known that since 1981. Mars is red too.

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
    1. Re:One of the worst story summaries ever by noigmn · · Score: 1

      I thought exactly the same when I read it. All you have to do is look at the thing to know it has clouds. And we've always known. The lander had to make its way through clouds when they put it down.

      The fact it is mentioned as the more important finding was amusing. My first thought was how long ago is this recycled from.

      --
      Slashdot is powered by your submission.
  21. Sweet by geekoid · · Score: 1

    now if sould moce it closer to the sun.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Sweet by geekoid · · Score: 1

      ok, I need to stop talking to one person, and typing something else at the same time.

      "now if sould moce it closer to the sun."
      should be:
      Now if we could only move it closer to the sun.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Sweet by Kim+Jong+Ill · · Score: 1

      Yeah I have that same problem with ravioli.

      --
      I don't want Karma, I just want to be a smart ass. All in favor, mod me up.
  22. Earth in deep freeze... by misleb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Whenever someone brings up colonizing another planet, I can't help but wonder "why?" Yes, there is the novelty factor of being able to do it. But how practical is it? What is the objective? Would we do it to preserve the species? From what? An asteriod hitting Earth and turning it into a wasteland? Could Earth possibly be any worse than Titan... or even Mars... in that case?

    Think about it. What is the best Earth alternative we could realistically hope to find?

    Want to colonize "Earth in Deep Freeze?" Antarctica isn't too far away. If nothing else, it has plenty of water and even oil. And if Global Warming gets as bad as some fear it might, Antarctica might not end up being such a bad place! Or what about colonizing the bottom on the ocean? Certainly that would be easier than traveling half way across the solar system... or farther.

    Seems to me that Earth would have to be all but vaporized for it to be much worse than any place you could find in outer space.

    -matthew

    --
    "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    1. Re:Earth in deep freeze... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      1) there are many catastropgies that would make life living here riskier then it is now.

      2) The technology needed to go to other planets and make the livable would help us with understanding what needs to be down here to make things nicers.

      3) As we expand our knowledge, we may find earth like planets, and having a technology base for travelling through space will be a very good thing.

      4) It's cool

      5) Contrary to what most people spout off, the space program generate new business and more taxdollars then it costs.

      Of course number for is a lousy reason to do it, but still, it's cool.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Earth in deep freeze... by Itchyeyes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I imagine a lot of the same questions were asked when we first started the space program. "Why even go into space?" I mean, it's just a vast nothingness right? There are plenty of place on earth that remain to be explored, like deep oceans and the rain forests."

      50 years later we have massive improvements in telecommunications, accurate weather forecasting, GPS, major breakthroughs in solar power, and a whole host of other new technologies that we discovered along the way. As with most science, you don't really know the full implications of something until after you've discovered it. Uncertainty doesn't always mean that a risk isn't worth taking.

    3. Re:Earth in deep freeze... by misleb · · Score: 1

      Don't get me wrong, I am all for exploration and research in space. I think there is a lot to learn. It is just that there is a difference between exploration and colonization. We're a long way from actually colonizing anything outside of Earth. It doesn't make much sense to start thinking of locations in terms of colonization unless there is some real practical drive for it. When really, there isn't.

      -matthew

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    4. Re:Earth in deep freeze... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, a few reasons:
      - Living on Mars (or wherever) would become the new trendy thing, to all the celebrities and rich people would move there and California would become affordable again...

      - Total Recall 2 would be more realistic...

      - We could send all the muslims there so they have their own planet and give us a break here. Plus given their usual dependance on other people for technology, we might get lucky enough that they can't figure out how to replace the batteries on the atmosphere generator.

    5. Re:Earth in deep freeze... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whenever someone brings up colonizing another planet, I can't help but wonder "why?" Well, one reason is to stop all of humanity from dying from any one act of destruction. Hawking talks about this now and again.
    6. Re:Earth in deep freeze... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I just replied to someone else here with the same questions. The type of colonization being proposed here isn't for large numbers of humans to move off-world permanently; it's just to establish bases for scientific research and mining. There's unimaginable quantities of natural resources available in the solar system, ranging from valuable metals to H3 which is used for nuclear fusion. Just like some people will temporarily live someplace crappy so they can get a nice paycheck from working in a mine, some people will happily work for a few years in space doing the same thing.

      It's going to be a long time before humans start trying to terraform other planets and live there in large numbers.

    7. Re:Earth in deep freeze... by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because we want to live in a fantasy world. Look, we've done Western, we've done modern, we've done World War II. Now all we have left is Fantasy or Science Fiction. While we may be far from faster than light travel, or building our own gravity in space ships, we are certainly more likely to live out the Science Fiction life style than Fantasy. We have no elves, trolls, orc, hobbits, or dragons (WHERE ARE ALL THE DRAGONS?!). So colonizing the moon will get us oh so closer to Cat-Women of the Moon.

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    8. Re:Earth in deep freeze... by delong · · Score: 1

      Could Earth possibly be any worse than Titan... or even Mars... in that case?

      Yes, it could get much worse. A not-very-large rock hitting the Earth could liquify the entire surface of the planet. How's that for getting much worse?

    9. Re:Earth in deep freeze... by Enigma2175 · · Score: 1
      It doesn't make much sense to start thinking of locations in terms of colonization unless there is some real practical drive for it.


      One of the smartest people alive, Professor Stephen Hawking, has recently stated that we should be colonizing other planets. He seems to think there is a practical drive for it - I would tend to trust his judgment in this matter over a random /. poster.
      --

      Enigma

    10. Re:Earth in deep freeze... by l0cust · · Score: 1

      Whenever someone brings up colonizing another planet, I can't help but wonder "why?" Yes, there is the novelty factor of being able to do it. But how practical is it? What is the objective? Would we do it to preserve the species? From what? An asteriod hitting Earth and turning it into a wasteland? Could Earth possibly be any worse than Titan... or even Mars... in that case?
      Yes it can possibly be Much much worse than Titan (or Mars) in that case for a number of reasons. First, in the absence of any other colony, Earth is all we will have at that time and if even a mediocre size meteor was to hit the earth, the entire civilization will go back hundreds(or thousands) of years at the least, not to mention the massive loss of life and the immense damage to the ecosystem and Earth as a whole - which may or may not be reversible. Now you may think of saving the critical infrastructure under some massive network of bunkers but how much can you save really? Can you save all the knowledge of different civilizations all across the globe which may or maynot give us the next breakthrough somewhere in future? How many people can you save at a time like that? How much bio-diversity can you recreate when you ran to a hole with a limited number of samples? And will you even have the ability to do change earth back to "normal-like" situation when you finally emerge from those bunkers, since you have no practical knowledge of how to go about doing such a thing - considering that your steered clear of trying anything like that on other planets because there was no need.

      We can sit here and perish or we can increase our chances of surviving as a species by setting up pockets of life in as many places as we can. We WILL have to move out eventually even if you think its a stupid idea now. Hell, forget about waiting for Sun to burn up totally, how much longer can the earth sustain us and the immense resources we require for our everyday life? How about getting new source for energy and other valuable raw materials from places where its just lying there, totally untapped. How about pushing the boundary of science and technology so that we have a choice of the type of life we want to live, instead of dying in future wars where everyone wants all the resources for himself. Read up some books about the importance of the control over sources of water and the wars which will most likely be fought over such a mundane thing like that. Its virtually a time-bomb we are sitting on and it will go off when its time comes whether you like it or not.

      Oh and about "Earth would have to be all but vaporized for it to be much worse than any place you could find in outer space", do you honestly believe that if we were to terraform or colonize another planet/satellite in the universe, it will always remain the same barren piece of rock and ice it is now? Its more probable that people will opt to live on those planets because we will have the chance to use the knowledge of centuries without making the same mistakes we did.

      We have come from stone age tools to this age because we have kept pushing boundaries. The moment we let go of our curiosity and innovation is the moment the countdown to our impending doom will start.
      --
      Politicians and Pedophiles: Two groups of exploitive bastards who are most dangerous when they're thinking of children.
  23. Re:Computing implications? by amightywind · · Score: 1
    Ok, I don't follow slashdot that closely, but I'm surprised; 21 comments and nothing about beowulf clusters or extreme overclocking yet.

    Readers are currently distracted by more trendy slashdot themes like the space elevator, anime, and global warming.

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
  24. Global Warming by American_Iridium · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Good thing we already know how to warm a planet up.

  25. or by geekoid · · Score: 1

    Geekoid Mountains!

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  26. orbits the sun opposite earth by fishdan · · Score: 1

    So we move Titan and put it in orbit at 93 million miles from the sun, in the same orbital path as the Earth, but on the opposite side of the sun. Do I have to do ALL the thinking here!?!?

    But Seriously -- someday we'll really do this. Or at least try

    --
    Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm
  27. Space Shuttle @ Station by stevesliva · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In other news, they're troubleshooting a flaky solar panel up on the space station: Live status

    --
    Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
  28. Oh, Wow! by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    Oh, wow! Earth has earthquakes. Titan has earth... er titanquakes. THEY'RE BOTH ALIKE! LET'S COLONIZE!

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  29. Sign me up! by PingSpike · · Score: 3, Funny

    -178c temperatures and highly poisonous hydrogen cyanide gas...I'd be surprised if there were any people left on earth once we figure out how to fly them onto to this thing!

    Has anyone started sellings plots of Titan moon land yet?

  30. Interesting find... by Kranfer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    While I find this interesting, it is nothing new to see mountains on planetary objects besides Earth. The thing I find most interesting is the organic compounds that have been found/thought to be on Titan. It makes a very interesting spot to create a waystation in the distand future. Titan, and well as Io and Europia are very interesting moons that we should explore more. But I doubt the American public is very willing to fund more in depth explorations of these places... I can only hope. Although, I wonder what the new probe on its way to Pluto will find.

    --
    -- Josh
    "Whoopie! Man, that may have been a small one for Neil, but that's a long one for me!" - Pete Conrad
    1. Re:Interesting find... by MORTAR_COMBAT! · · Score: 1

      I don't have too much hope for the Pluto probe finding much of anything scientifically worth while -- but as an American I am definitely interested and willing to fund more in depth explorations of Titan, Io, and Europa. Take the 100 Billion USD or so from the wars on drugs and for oil and put it directly into the space program. (Or, better, return it to the economy directly.)

      --
      MORTAR COMBAT!
    2. Re:Interesting find... by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      No way man, we'll use the current plan, which is as follows:

      1.) Detonate ancient pyramid in Central America
      2.) Colonize Mars
      3.) Convert Phobos into a giant spacecraft
      4.) Let some 300 years pass
      5.) Get saved from the Pfhor by a rampant AI (thanks, Durandal!)
      6.) ???
      7.) Get thoroughly beaten up by the Covenant, blow up a couple space rings

      It's the Seven Step Plan To Get Our World Dominated By Someone Else and we're going to stick to it!

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  31. Seismic is good? by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

    So, we're looking for a planetoid that moves, because that makes building a permanent settlement easier? Oh, yeah, I'd love to set up a new colony in a place that has the stability of Loma Prieta.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  32. Um....wha? by argStyopa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Well, as scientists scan the skies for the easiest piece of mass to colonize, things that resemble Earth's geology & atmosphere are going to require the least effort & resources."

    That's a rather meaningless (or outright WRONG) statement.

    Mars: tectonically dead or nearly so. Dust storms but no real analogue to Earthly seas, precipitation, or geological processes. Ability to colonize? Relatively easy.

    Titan: mountains, clouds, precipitation, "seas", etc. Ability to colonize? Extremely difficult.

    Similarity to Earthly processes is meaningless. There are plenty of Earthly processes that make things HARDER, not easier.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:Um....wha? by Vreejack · · Score: 1

      True. The moon is even easier to colonize, due to its proximity and the fact that it has no weather of its own to speak of. The availability of water might make a difference between Mars and the moon, but so far the data is incomplete.

      --
      "Will future ages believe that such stupid bigotry ever existed!" -- Ivanhoe
  33. Rather rough comparison by Joebert · · Score: 2, Funny
    "It has a lot of the geological processes that Earth has. In fact, it is more Earth-like than anywhere else in the Solar System. But the surface is very cold; it's about minus 178C."

    Isn't that a little like saying the bodies in the morgue are better friends than anyone else I know ?

    They're friendly, they'll sit there and listen to me for hours, they're just a little cold on the surface.
    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
  34. Obligatory by ekstasy · · Score: 1

    In Soviet Russia, Titan colonizes you!

  35. Re:Resembles Earth? If you squint at it, yeah! by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Either Titan gets moved or you make a local energy source. Terraforming the Moon is probably as easy.

    Nahh, simply push that gas giant over the edge so she ignites into a second small star in the solar system.

    quite easy, just start flinging crap into it until the mass get's high enough to start up the furnace.

    Sheesh, you science types have to make everything so difficult.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  36. Pedantry by thestuckmud · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, the title should be "The Sierra of Titan". The word sierra refers to an entire mountain range, and the plural is rarely appropriate. This might weaken the Vonnegut allusion a bit, but at least it uses the word correctly.

    This is a common mistake. TFA quotes one of the scientists behind the work saying: "One could call them Titan's Sierras." While I might not expect much of slashdot summaries, he should know better.

    1. Re:Pedantry by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      I suspect that the usage is correct. When I hear mountains within a range referred to, it's in the plural. Witness the Alps, for example. No one refers to the range as "The Alp". The name of the range may be singular. When referring to all the mountains within the range, the name of the range is often written in the plural as sort of a contraction. I'm not a grammarian or anything. I'm just commenting on usage patterns I've seen and heard.

    2. Re:Pedantry by Requiem+Aristos · · Score: 1

      The source language of the word also matters. In this case, I would refer not to "the Alps" but to "the Sierra Nevada" or "the Sierra Madre".

      Also, neither "alps" nor "sierra" appear to refer to a plural, even though the -s ending of "alps" may create that impression. (While "alp" also exists as a word, it was a back-formation from the original "alps".)

    3. Re:Pedantry by thestuckmud · · Score: 1
      I suspect that the usage is correct
      If enough people begin to suspect the same usage as you, the language will eventually change. But we are not there yet. In the meantime, check out the definition of sierra in a dictionary.

      If you want to argue, go look up "Sierra Nevada" on Wikipedia and tell me that mountain range is also called "The Sierras". Just be prepared when I tell you I like to call it "Home of the Flying Spaghetti Monster".
    4. Re:Pedantry by zeno_2 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that when I lived in Carson City, I've heard people refer to the Sierra Nevada mountain range as the Sierras.

  37. Higher Than Highest by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Informative

    '"One could call them Titan's Sierras," the University of Arizona-Tucson researcher [ET explorer Bob Brown] added.'

    I get the Vonnegut pun in "The Sierras of Titan". But none of "the" Sierras are even the tallest in the US (or North America). Alaska's Mt McKinley is taller. While Everest (and over 100 others) in the Himalayas are taller than any in the Andes from their somewhat arbitrary base, the equatorial Andes start at the 26mi "high" equatorial bulge.

    So Aconcagua, the tallest of the Andes, is the farthest peak jutting into space. Aconcagua rises the highest from the Marianas Trench, the lowest point in the Earth's crust, atop the equatorial bulge. Thus it is the closest to our solar neighbor (at least half the time, during its rotation with the Earth, anyway).

    One might better call them "los Andes de Titan", or whatever that translates to in the whistle/crackle language spoken on Titan.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Higher Than Highest by markov_chain · · Score: 1

      I wonder if the Titanians have folk CDs entitled "Vientos del metano de los Andes"

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
    2. Re:Higher Than Highest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A correction to your post:

      Chimborazo in the Andes, not Aconcagua, is the "tallest" by measure of distance from the center of the earth (distance jutting into space, if you will). Aconcagua is the tallest in the Andes by measure of distance above sea level, though.

    3. Re:Higher Than Highest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, the Sierra Nevada range does include the tallest mountain in the lower 48, Mount Whitney. But I agree, the first thought that came to me was that calling them the Sierras instead of the Himalayas was kinda stupid. (I, uncultured barbarian that I am, didn't get the pun.)

    4. Re:Higher Than Highest by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Actually, Mt Chimborazo rises the highest into space, as the equatorial bulge is steeper than the ground at the "base" between Chimborazo and Aconcagua.

      I'm fascinated by the fact that the closest approach to Earth from space is the crater mouth of an (extinct) volcano. It's almost like a docking interface.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    5. Re:Higher Than Highest by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Ach, you beat me to the summit of Mt Redundant!

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    6. Re:Higher Than Highest by tafinucane · · Score: 1

      The Sierra Nevada range has the highest peak in the contiguous 48 states, Mt Whitney.
      Also, the quoted researcher who made the comparison was referring to their similarity, not that he thought the Sierras are the tallest on earth.

      And to the earlier pedant, plenty of people refer to the range as "The Sierras", including Doctors of extraterrestrial geology.

    7. Re:Higher Than Highest by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      If we're going to use the "center" of the earth as our reference point (thus counting the equatorial bulge) -- we need to not only use Chimborazo as the "farthest" point, but use the Artic Ocean (not the Maiana Trench) as the "closest" point.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench

      The trench has a maximum depth of 10,911 meters (35,798 ft) below sea level. Taking into account its latitude and the Earth's equatorial bulge, this puts it at 6,366,400 meters (3,955.9 mi) from the center of the Earth. The Arctic Ocean, on the other hand, is about 4,500 meters (14,800 ft) deep, which would put its floor at 6,353,000 meters (3,947 mi) from the Earth's center, some 13 kilometers (8.5 mi) closer.

  38. Boy.....you're right.... by StressGuy · · Score: 1

    Once you got that thing going it would be hell to stop it again.

    --
    A goal is a dream with a deadline
    1. Re:Boy.....you're right.... by Bertie · · Score: 1

      I'll get my mother to crochet a MASSIVE net to catch it.

  39. Wow. Clouds, huh? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Isn't it basically ALL clouds, or does the red haze not count?

    And like a tree falling in a forest, if you have a cloud inside a thick haze, would anyone notice?

    1. Re:Wow. Clouds, huh? by volcanopele · · Score: 1

      There are some lower clouds that been observed in the "Sierras" (assuming of course these are in fact mountains, which I'm not convinced they are) region, but most of the features we see in these VIMS, RADAR, and ISS (yes, ISS does see the surface...) images are surface features. Yes, there is a thick haze layer in Titan's upper atmosphere, but at the near-infrared and microwave wavelengths that those instruments use, we can see through the haze and observe the surface.

      --
      The Gish Bar Times - Blog covering Jupiter's moon Io
  40. Disappointing by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

    "There are plenty of Earthly processes that make things HARDER, not easier."

    Here we are having a nice scientific discussion, and you had to bring PORN into it. Sheesh

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  41. Watch out... by Umbrae · · Score: 1

    Watch out for the wampas.

  42. You meant to say.. by poity · · Score: 2, Funny

    ..The Tetons of Titan!

    --
    your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
  43. Stilts made of what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those stilts would have to be made of something strong enough to provide physical support yet not conductive of heat which would melt their foundations.

    No metals would work, nor even concrete. So what were you suggesting, or hadn't you thought it through?

    1. Re:Stilts made of what? by pclminion · · Score: 2, Informative

      No metals would work, nor even concrete. So what were you suggesting, or hadn't you thought it through?

      Let's say carbon steel, with a thermal conductivity of 54 watts per meter-kelvin. Imagine a carbon steel stilt, 10 cm in radius (20 cm diameter), and 5 meters tall. In reality, a stilt would probably be hollow or I-beam shaped (a solid bar 20 cm across is way overkill), so this calculation OVERESTIMATES the conducted power. Assume the temperature difference between the top and bottom of the stilt is 200 kelvins (94 K for surface of Titan, ~300 K for room temperature). Plug it in:

      k = P*H/(A*DT) where P is the conducted power, H is the height, DT is the temperature difference, A is cross sectional area of the stilt. Solve for the conducted power:

      P = k*A*DT/H. We have values k=54 W/m*K, A=2*Pi*0.1^2 meters, DT=200 kelvins, H=5 meters. What do we get? Conducted power is 135 watts. On this damn stilt only 135 watts will leak out of the bottom. So hey, let's calculate power density using a few other reasonable values.

      Assume the stilt is buried 1 meter beneath the surface. So we have a total buried surface area of 1 meter * 2*pi*0.1 meters = 0.63 square meters, or 6300 square centimeters. So the power density is only 135 watts / 6300 cm^2 = ONLY 21.4 milliwatts per square centimeter.

      Now, this is all very encouraging already, but hey! Why not do the proper engineering thing and actually INSULATE the stilts at the points where they connect to the living structure. Now the heat transfer to the ground we have to worry about will be FAR, FAR less than even a wimpy 21.4 milliwatts per cm^2.

      Oh and hey! We've forgotten about the heat which is lost when it radiates away from the stilt. This calculation doesn't even ATTEMPT to figure that in. And that effect would serve to even FURTHER reduce the thermal power being conducted to the ground.

      Basically, you have no idea what the hell you're speculating on.

    2. Re:Stilts made of what? by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 1

      Heck you could use some sort of aerogel... if you have the technology to put giant beams of 'carbon steel' on Titan, you should be able to come up with a high strength aerogel.

      My original point is it would not be as easy as the first poster suggested. Nothing about Titan makes it a good place in the solar system to colonize. Mars is much better... even Earth's moon or asteroids would be easier.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
    3. Re:Stilts made of what? by pclminion · · Score: 1

      Heck you could use some sort of aerogel... if you have the technology to put giant beams of 'carbon steel' on Titan, you should be able to come up with a high strength aerogel.

      I chose carbon steel because it has a relatively high thermal conductivity, so it would be hard to argue against the numbers. Yeah, obviously steel is not the sort of material you want to be bringing to Titan.

      Also, since Titan has a surface gravity about 1/7th that of Earth, any supports you use won't have to be nearly as large as they would be on Earth -- and therefore wouldn't conduct as much heat.

      Mars is probably a smarter choice, but it would not be IMPOSSIBLE to set up a colony on Titan, at least not because of the heat issue.

    4. Re:Stilts made of what? by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 1

      I chose carbon steel because it has a relatively high thermal conductivity

      don't you want low thermal conductivity (e.g. aerogel)? You want to insulate the surface from your heat, not conduct it to the surface (that was the GP's point)

      Mars is probably a smarter choice, but it would not be IMPOSSIBLE to set up a colony on Titan, at least not because of the heat issue.

      It wouldn't be impossible to put a colony on Venus, or even Jupiter either (ala Cloud City in Empire Strikes Back)... just really, really hard.

      You could radiate your heat into the atmosphere in such a way as to not heat up the atmosphere much or the ground barely at all. But to do so would be a major complexity... even if the surface was covered in diamonds as big as volkswagons, it probably wouldn't be worth the trouble.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
    5. Re:Stilts made of what? by pclminion · · Score: 1

      don't you want low thermal conductivity (e.g. aerogel)? You want to insulate the surface from your heat, not conduct it to the surface (that was the GP's point)

      I chose steel because it's a very poor choice. If even a very poor choice is okay, then a GOOD choice is even better, no?

    6. Re:Stilts made of what? by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 1

      but how do you get that steel is ok? you don't know how much thermal flux is needed to melt the surface and you don't how much heat is produced by a fictional colony. Huygens barely produced any heat (just a little from RHUs) and it boiled off methane that was either frozen or liquid. Calculating a thermal budget is a very complicated thing, and not something you can handwave on slashdot... especially when your results don't pass a smell test.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
  44. I'm there by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    So let's say we put a tether on Titan and attached an ion drive. How many years would it take to move it out of orbit around Jupiter and into an orbit around, and closer to, the sun? I'm not too picky about the temperature personally, but below -150C... well, let's put it this way: Have you ever heard about how using hairspray to make a flamethrower can cause the can to explode? Well something similar happens when you try to pee at extremely low temperatures. I just don't want to rupture any internal (or external) organs as the stream solidifies, is what I'm saying. So if we could move Titan somewhere closer to -50C or above, that would be great.

    1. Re:I'm there by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      And to all the naysayers, obviously I know Titan is in orbit around Saturn right now.. I meant after we moved it to Jupiter.

  45. Yeah but think of the benefits by baggins2001 · · Score: 1

    The lower temperature will make it easier to provide a room temperature superconductor.

    --
    He who said 1,000,000 monkeys on 1,000,000 typewriters would eventually type the great novel, never saw an AOL chat room
  46. A tad bit chilly, no doubt... by redblue · · Score: 1

    but perfect for an eco-friendly hydrogen economy! http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/06/12/13/012 249.shtml

  47. Deliberately Selected Junk Story of the Day? by skywire · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    What bilge. The editors have stated publicly that they shoot for a certain formulaic mix, rather than to pick the best stories. It's becoming obvious that one element of the mix is the laughably stupid story.

    --
    Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
    1. Re:Deliberately Selected Junk Story of the Day? by snickkers · · Score: 1

      of course *slaps forehead* we could just overclock titan, then it would just heat itself up! Imagine a Beowulf cluster of THOSE.

      --
      GLORX 3:16
  48. Location by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Location, Location, Location!

  49. Mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seemed like a minor bit in the original post, but the utter infeasibility (requiring nuclear processes) of making oxygen from carbon and hydrogen has to be pointed out.

  50. Helium might be ideal by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1

    Actually, I think a better question would be why use air?

    Air has oxygen and water vapor in it, both of which react with a wide variety of materials in the right conditions. Water also condenses (obviously) well above the temperature on Titan, and oxygen boils right around the surface temperature at the ambient pressure. Condensed fluids are useless dead weight, and at the cost per pound of an interplanetary probe, dead weight is not cool. Realistically, NASA would probably choose a non-reactive, pure gas like helium or nitrogen specifically for this reason. Nitrogen has a nice feature in that the Titan atmosphere is 98% N2 (only 1.6% CH4, actually), so the difference in partial pressure inside and outside the envelope is almost neglible, and it won't leak very fast at all.

    Any heat generated inside the envelope would decrease the density of a given volume and pressure, so you can achieve some buoyancy. Nitrogen or air, the latter being a worse case, are already at or above the density of Titan atmosphere, so they would need to stay significantly warmer than the outside environment to produce significant lift. The warmer it is, the faster it loses heat, meaning it needs either more insulation than just a pressure envelope, or a bigger reactor to supply more heat. Either means more weight which means more lift needed. All this time you're also increasing the launch weight from Earth. Just warming it to get more lift is a catch 22 of sorts.

    So you come out far ahead if you can contain hydrogen or helium, which have 1/14 to 1/7* the density respectively at a given T and P. Because of the greater lifting effectiveness, you don't need as large of an envelope which means lower launch mass. Of course, these gasses could still certainly benefit to a degree with the power supply contained inside the envelope, and you could probably save even a tiny bit more mass in that scheme...or add more scientific payload.

    The downside is that hydrogen and helium are non-polar particles with extremely small radii, so they have a serious tendency to leak out of their containers. Thus the envelope may have to be thicker to effectively contain them, which is another weight tradeoff. I couldn't make a firm conclusion off the bat, but I'd be willing to bet that helium or hydrogen still come out clearly on top. * Diatomic hydrogen has a molecular mass 1/14 that of diatomic nitrogen. Helium may have an atomic weight 4 times as much as hydrogen, but it is mono-atomic in it's natural state, so the density is only twice that of hydrogen gas.

    1. Re:Helium might be ideal by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 1

      The hot air in this case would be Titan's ambient atmosphere. No oxygen or water vapour.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
    2. Re:Helium might be ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a good point. Also no gas to transport from earth, but there's still the larger envelope size and the necessity of a warm envelope. I still think a lighter gas would make more sense.