I doubt a nuke would do anything to divert the path of a comet.

Originally posted by MrJingles
I doubt a nuke would do anything to divert the path of a comet.

The comet in question is not very large, and if you look at the applet linked above you will notice that 76P comes VERY close to Mars in 2000. It would not have to move it much starting from so far out.

I believe it is possible.

i dont approve of the idea of nuking mars, thats just terrible.
it needs to be done in phases, obviously. we need to get a source of water on the planet, a comet or whatever, but, more importantly, we need more of an atmosphere, with some sort of pressure. u cud have a number of processing plants, unmanned, on mars, that cud do a number of things, such as making energy, producing water, growing plants, anything. the point of these is less in what they will be doing, but more in what they cud emit. water vapor, carbon dioxide. maybe nitrogen, but wud have to be worked out with the plants. these gases do a great job of keeping in heat and keeping the place a little more hospitable. then we can bring in the water.
venus has its own problem. the atmosphere is too dense, theres too much, and its the hottest planet in the solar system, way too hot for us. its much easier to make something denser and hotter than to remove gas from venus and cool it down. on the gases, theres just too plain out much, and itd be impossible to start, everything wud get trashed. as to the heat, well, even if we made it earthlike, itd be hotter, much, since its closer, and it wud also get more deadly uv rays, making it need more of an atmosphere, which gets u back to the beginning.

Frankly I think that you would have better success terreforming Venus. much more raw material to work with.

The only problem with that is Venus day is longer than its year which means that the same side stays toward the sun.......... mostly

It would be hard to live on a world like that about the only place you could live would be the temperate zone which in this case would slowly move. The weather would be hell.

"If the commet isn't very large, then why bother. "

Because it is available at a time when it is possible. You don't need to aim to hit, only to enter the gravity well, and there are other things to do to increase your chances...

"Frankly I think that you would have better success terreforming Venus. much more raw material to work with."

It is possible, but much more work must be done compared with Mars. Maybe another thread?

"both planets have their challenges."

To meet the challenge you need catastrophe. The closest we could come to that would be nuclear weapons, but nuking Mars would defeat the purpose. Instead use the nukes carefully and allow mother nature to provide...

"http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~mfogg/book.htm"

Very interesting, and I may reference it later.

Originally posted by Amuk
The only problem with that is Venus day is longer than its year which means that the same side stays toward the sun.......... mostly

easy, jsut change the orbit
yeah, really, venus and earth are similar in size and mass. nothin else really, im pretty sure it even revolves the other way.
mars is our best bet. only bet really, after that we're sorta screwed for the time being. best not # this up.

Originally posted by ArchAngel
Not nuking Mars. Using a nuke to divert a comet.
[Edited on 17-2-2004 by ArchAngel]

i was referring to a widely thrown around idea for terraforming mars, where we use weapons-grade plutonium to make it more hospitable.
that was what was absurd and moronic.

The funny thing is not only could this work there were missions that were sent at the proper time to do it, and supposedly failed....

Originally posted by ArchAngel
What if the Mars Polar Lander was not really on that rocket? What if it did not fail, but went on to do a different mission?

k. thats all i was askin for, i thought u meant the literal, public image of odyssey
cud be, i dunno, if it worked wud we be seein the effects by now?