Going terribly fast towards another significant body of gravity isn't much of a problem, especially if that's having anything to due with falling onto the moon. Slowing down, much less comming to a near stop as would be the case of parking something ISS like at the ME-L1 nullification (gravety well) zone is quite another issue.
It seems we always have a perfectly good (as in safe and sane) need for less speed, such as for recovering spendy satellites that have malfunctioning parachutes, and on behalf of salvaging the souls of astronauts taking in a bit more reentry speed with less heat-shield than bargained for, and for the slower aspects of said terminal velocity is nearly always offering the better option, that is unless you're trying to leave town in a hurry with utilizing as little energy as possible, as then speed is everything and of whatever is less getting in your way becomes the better. It seems most any fool can somehow manage to travel at speeds greater than can be survived, at least the trick has usually been on behalf of avoiding running into stuff as much as for the rather testy requirement of stoping, and without the option of a good amount of terminal velocity(Vt) to work with, it seems that issue of stopping becomes the far greater challenge if not the demise of whatever or whomever was previously traveling faster and faster.
This ongoing topic has been yet another pesky learning curve for myself understanding terminal velocity, whereas such it should be pretty much about what most everyone else supposedly knows all there is to know about such matters of velocity, or at least blindly accepts by way of similar folks having believed in absolutely anything having previously been funded by the sorts of whomever has obtained our much valued NASA/Apollo moderated to death mainstream stamp of approval (sort of their UL sticker of all that's astronomy), and as for such individuals delivering upon a worthy amount of honest data as representing the one and only gospel there is (especially of their moon data), whereas supposedly such moderated and/or peer approved information upon the likes of Venus being so freaking hot and nasty should always be taken exactly as-is where-is, as for representing the absolute whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help they obtain their next round of public funding, or else.
Obviously I'm no happy camper, in that so far all that I've learned is that whatever the truth is about anything related to the terminal velocity of landing stuff on the moon, as well as per space travel is yet another load of infomercial hype, with the usual spin and apparently loads of "so what's the difference" tossed in for good measure, with essentially obtaing nothing believably specific that you can take to the bank. For instance, there's contradictions and numbers all over the place with respect as to how much mass a photon can represent by transporting such energy or mass about, there isn't even any apparent number established on the available photons/cm3 nor even per atom, and absolutely zilch upon those nearly-resting photons, yet photons by the vast numbers seems to comprise at least 99.9999999999999999999999% (1e24:1) of our universe, if not greater. This analogy is suggesting it's much worse off than swimming under Niagara Falls and asking for a glass of water, yet lo and behold, the lords of GR, SR and QM haven't got squat to work with that stipulates otherwise.
I've even tried learning whatever about those few lunar atmospheric atoms there are, if such as O2 and heavier atoms might have become somewhat more populated and thereby capable of transferring a sufficient level of energy, especially since sound-wave energy travels so much faster in such a near vacuum which makes for the kinetic energy as ultrasonic that's worthy of transferring in that format, thus being detected acoustically before the ground-waves of whatever related seismic energy arrives at the same instrument. All I ever got was the approved script of regardless of whatever impact energy "it's entirely impossible to detect sound-wave energy upon the moon", as in period! Thus the near surface atmosphere (say the first 10 meters worth) is supposedly the near Vacuum of 3e-15 bar (43.6e-15 psi), which simply doesn't make for a whole lot of sense if considering the gravity and ample terrain that's worthy of trapping a great deal of thin air.
Terraforming the moon requires an atmosphere that'll stick around.
The terminal velocity aspects of the moon really sucks. In other words, there really isn't all that much natural atmosphere to work with. However, since there's no water vapor or other elements similar that could be noticed by astronomy, a more substantial atmosphere that's due to the 1/6th gravity(1.623) having to hug the surface by a kilometer at most would not alter/shift the albedo of the moon by more than a percent or two (unless we could manage to pollute such gas with enough particulate), and since we have nothing outside of whatever our NASA/Apollo or other science that must following within their steps or else, as per not ever conflicting one iota with whatever those Apollo cows that are never coming home had to say, as such their supposed 2e5 atoms/cm3 is all there is, if that much.
Somehow I find this topic of such minimal lunar atmosphere to being another one of those politically correct forms of science and physics that can't be honestly discussed unless you unconditionally accept their NASA/Apollo version. As otherwise the honest science of whatever natural lunar atmosphere simply is not there to behold, much less any support towards creating an artificial one.
Besides the supposed (as reported by NASA/Apollo) 2e5 population of atoms/cm3 that's available, whereas at 5 atoms/cm3 being supposedly what those sensitive CCD cameras were capable of detecting as sodium atoms, and if those trailing sodium atoms having managed to be detected out past 900,000 km behind the moon, as such being initially created by way of meteorite impacts, then blown off the moon in part by the 30 km/s headway, and otherwise by solar winds of better than 600 km/s, as then lo and behold there's surely an indirect method of extrapolating the near surface populations of these freshly created sodium atoms.
Since I've asked of others to share in whatever they think the lunar atmosphere of mostly sodium could represent, and not surprisingly all I ever obtained was their usual pro-NASA/Apollo or bust contributions, however if we utilized the square of the distance as based upon establishing the ever increasing atom population as impact induced trailing cloud of sodium nears the lunar surface, as this seems a viable analogy that's perfectly acceptable to many folks, and whereas the following values become sufficiently true.
@900,000 km = 5 atoms/cm3
@450,000 km = 20 atoms/cm3
@900 km = 5e6 atoms/cm3
@900 meters = 5e12 atoms/cm2
On the deck = 5e18 atoms/cm3
Of course there's most likely a little more than just sodium vapors created via meteor impact. Surely lighter than sodium and of those atoms much heavier should also have been vaporised into action. Since heavier atoms of perhaps oxygen, argon and CO2 are bound to exist, along with any number of metallic substances and just about anything you can think of is somewhere to being found upon the lunar surface that's hosting such a viable morgue of whatever the universe has to offer, whereas the heavier than sodium atoms supposedly should stick around.
Unlike Earth, whereas the vast bulk of nearly everything that's headed for us or within our path is either deflected and/or absorbed by our atmosphere (smaller suff being dealt with by our Van Allen zone of death), as such not arriving upon nor accumulating for the billions of years as is the case with the lunar environment. Everything from Venus spores to flying diatoms are surely to be included within the matrix of all that's otherwise of space debris from less than sand to serious bolder sized (100+kg) meteors that's within the path and gravity influence of the moon is in fact eventually collected by way of impacting upon the lunar surface if it hasn't been otherwise influenced as to arriving upon Earth.
What I'm recently suggesting is that perhaps we should have been tossing loads of stuff at our moon, the more the better, and especially since everything that reaches the lunar surface impacts and thereby interacts with the moon by way of becoming vaporised. If that effort could include the heavier sorts of atoms that'll stick around, as such this would certainly add rather than subtract.
The lunar surface offers humanity something that's far better than oil, and besides the moon itself accommodating the LSE-CM/ISS gateway, among many good things it apparently offers us those easily accessible loads of He3 or 3He depending on whichever is the correct terminology. I believe it also has the potential of sustaining a slight atmosphere (as based upon other moons nowhere neat the ideal zone of life hosting even more than Earth), starting off with what's situated on the deck = 5e18 atoms/cm3 of sodium as created from meteor impacts that I've pointed out to others as being most likely the case.
As to what other atoms besides sodium is easily vaporised into existence upon impact, I've located what some of your typical basalt composition has to offer, which clearly indicates there should be an abundance of O2 among many other atoms heavy enough to stick around.
Take notice that the sodium (Na20) portion is less than 3.5%, thus obviously the populations of other atoms besides sodium are in fact created and most likely contributed to the near surface atmosphere of the moon. You simply can't obtain one without creating the others.
Basalt properties = more than just sodium
Basalt and granite have much in common. Both are igneous rocks as cooled from magma. Each are made up of minerals from the silicate group, thereby both have large amounts of silica and oxygen, though basalts do offer some light colored minerals such as feldspar and quartz; 45-59% SiO2, high in Fe, Mg, Ca, and otherwise generally low amounts in K and Na. Basalts generally contain the minerals of olivine, pyroxene and plagioclase.
Basalt so happens to be the most widely distributed rock like substance upon earth. It is formed from solidified molten lava. It represents 90% of all such igneous rocks on earth. It is nearly black when extracted, though changes color once in contact with the atmosphere (moon having such little atmosphere means lunar basalt remains nearly black, thus the 11% average lunar reflective index is perfectly consistant with a typical 5~6% index for raw basalt). Basalts also contain small amounts of quartz, feldspar, pyroxenes and olivene, and otherwise offers a fine grain. It is also closely related to andesite, though basalt remains darker in color.
As processed into basalt fiber: density = 2.7 g/cm3
Silica(SiO2), Iron FeO or Fe2O3), Magnesium(MgO), Sodium(Na2O), and potassium(K2O), Calcium(CaO), Titianium(TiO2), Pentoxide(P2O5), Pyrolusite(MnO), Ceramic Material(Cr2O3), Aluminum Oxide(A12O3)
This learning curve is also where I've otherwise accepted upon the vast majority of just about everything other that's been NASA approved, with the minor exception to certain aspects of those NASA/Apollo scriptures pertaining to the surface environment of our moon that just do not add up, especially the lack of any Kodak recorded color shift/skew of what the raw solar energy had to offer, and those interesting aspects of terminal velocity that'll allow just about anything to nail your moonsuit butt, and so much so that I've given one of my usual complex 357/9mm shots at what should add up and of what clearly doesn't.
Now it seems that I'm right back into bucking those well established fables about Venus that seem to have been somewhat incomplete if not skewed upon their having to conform to the sorts of leadership or misleadership that has recently been excluding folks away from the likes of realizing anything Venus, keeping our mainstream media from becoming focused, much less directly evolved with what I've discovered, and thereby knowingly bigoted as well as stone-walling against the sorts of greenhouse survival-smart-ass lizard folk that apparently, according to that of our know-everything space and related science lord and master(NASA), couldn't possibly have ever lived upon Venus in the first place, much less managed to have survived regardless of whatever those damn laws of physics or Darwin or applied technology is having to say. According to acceptable NASA scriptures, apparently heathens at best of whatever planets can't possibly figure out how to shit in their own pants, much less independently survive without our all-knowing wisdom.
OK, so apparently the likes of such primitive intelligence can only coexist as per here on this extremely flat Earth, of which all other existence merely orbits and/or worships our pathetic frame of existence, and where the likes of Darwin has become classified as yet another NASA certified freaking village idiot moron, and of whatever environmentally motivated adaptations by way of those laws of physics and of biology/DNA evolution which have clearly been specified by the pro-NASA cultism as doable upon Earth as well as Mars is where humans can't possibly survive elsewhere, and even by way of many qualified folks claiming that such extreme life has somehow managed to being applicable towards surviving upon a sub-frozen, TBI and easily pulverised Mars without a local gram or joule of energy, whereas those same arguments applied on behalf of realizing the potential for other life existing and/or surviving upon Venus where there's more freaking energy than you can shake that flaming stick at simply are not being allowed to function, unless they alone (the mainstream status quo) cares to say so, and that's only if and when they're damn good and ready, and apparently that's of not another decade sooner if such can be avoided.
Keeping in mind that other life on Venus need not be that of naked heatheons, as evolution and applied technology isn't something that's restricted to the dumbfounded and easily snookered humanity of Earth, especially when there's been a perfectly good incentive of a rising thermal environment over a transition of hundreds if not thousands of years, and you've got access to unlimited amounts of energy at your disposal that'll surmount just about any hot and nasty situation that you or others can possibly think of. If you'd like to argue this energy topic, please do so.
It seems however, those pesky laws of physics and of whatever is biologically possible are just as need be, intentionally skewed into any one of their spendy space-toilets, as into imposing that by way of anything Darwin or of otherwise applied technology simply can NOT function upon Venus, and especially if it's pertaining to whatever's outside of their politically correct status quo box, or of whatever their "Skull and Bones" nondisclosure mainstream cult sustains on behalf of whatever their precious NSA/DoD(DHS) and NASA has to say. As in no matters what, it's much like questioning the exterminations of Cathars, or the existence of those WMD, or upon those morals and truths and/or remorse pertaining to our perpetrated cold-war but otherwise accepting as is our radiation and physical impact proof astronauts as their having to avoid all those potentially lethal factors of secondary TBI and them lunar dust-bunny impacts as representing yet another official intellectual zone of taboo that similar to their "Skull and Bones" nondisclosure cultism that's been ongoing of more than four decades and counting, and don't even bother asking about those NASA/Apollo Kodak moments that recorded the exact spectrum of xenon instead of any raw solar energy.
Our NASA/NSA/DoD(DHS) spooks must thank God, or at least their lucky stars, that Americans have become so pathetically dumb and dumber, as in so freaking dumbfounded that as a cultivated intellectual incest collective of snookered fools they'll actually believe in absolutely anything that's offered by way of the status-quo, of whatever their foolish mainstream has to deliver upon, even if it's another self inflicted 9/11 demise of tens of thousands, and then having to round up all of those tricky though invisible WMD running amuck, feeling entirely justified as long as we can blame absolutely everything on those darn irrational terrorist that have been oddly striking out at us and of American/Jewish interest for absolutely no apparent reasons whatsoever. Clearly the American/Jewish and Born again Christian mainstreamers are merging into one massive blood-river that's offering humanity all that counts, all that matters and all justifying as for the oppression of others and upon the tens of thousands of entirely innocent folks that should get a little too lose for comfort. God forbid, we wouldn't want to set any alternative do-good examples for the future, especially since at this rate there really isn't going to become all that much of a future to worry about. The haves simply want first dibs at every last stinking once and gram of whatever's left that's keeping the havenots alive, and that shouldn't translate into anything which someone could possibly complain about, and if you actually believe all of that is exactly how thing should be, there's no point in my suggesting otherwise.
In other kind words, it seems that our NASA/NSA/DoD has become simply so chuck full of itself, of such an absolute collective of pretentious bastards (mostly per sustaining their old-guard of their cold-war ruse, and/or of their old-guard replacement suck-ups having been incest cloned so that they wouldn't have the balls to changed the past, the present nor future for any reason you or I can possibly think of), of the sorts of folks that would just as soon see the continuing demise of humanity as opposed to their intellectually tight butts getting the least bit involved with an honest exploration of exactly what our moon has always had to offer, and especially upon the likes of Venus and of our mutual relationship with the Sirius star system as having the major influence upon life as we know it. Since any notions of our existing guard having to start telling the rest of us folks the truth and nothing but the truth, as instead of that remote impossibility ever transpiring, it's the business as usual to cover thy butt and so help them selves first.
(end of entro rant)
Terminal Velocity(Vt), searching for the "Fastest Space Travel" as well as slowest possible landing speeds
Firstly, in order to understand and further appreciate of what the notion of going places really fast represents, we'll need to stay somewhat mentally and physically connected to the reality of what and of why our Earth has to offer such spendy and risky complications of preventing us from going places far and wide, and that of comparing our environment offering somewhat speed limited mobility within our atmosphere as compared to that of Mars, and far better yet being the nearly unlimited terminal velocity of zooming about our very own moon where seemingly the notions of whatever terminal velocity simply isn't even there to behold, at least not at any 2e5 atoms/cm3 as maximized by perfectly honest folks of ESA having to work from our very own NASA/Apollo data, of which I've found other official NASA/Apollo research stipulating upon far fewer atoms/cm3 amounting to a mere 10 short tons worth of absolutely everything the lunar atmosphere has to offer, which is damn near imposing itself as an absolute Vacuum of 3e-15 bar, or .333e-15:1 less pressure than Earth.
BTW; upon Earth it actually requires quite a great deal of technology as well as artificial energy as to create and sustain such a near vacuum as 3e-15 bar.
Found new data specifying upon the atoms/ccm on Earth as being 3e19
Worth taking note; according to this ECSS report "The neutral Earth atmosphere" there's 2.4e19 atoms/cm3 as to be found upon Earth
Thereby the Venus atmosphere of mostly CO2/N2(@r6052 km), and even though it's so much toastier should offer at least 2e21 atoms/cm3
Earth atmosphere (sealevel being of one bar averages the 2.4e19/cm3) varies from 2e19 ~ 3e19 atoms/cm3.
Whereas the Moon (as upon the lunar deck and under the absolutely blazing solar influx of nearly 1400 w/m2 [24/7] @3e-15 bar) supposedly offers 2e5 atoms/cm3.
Even though I'm in favor of there being considerably greater populations of atoms than merely 2e5/cm3, at 25 tonnes worth of lunar atmosphere, and the moon providing 38e12 m2 of sphere to cover = 25e6 / 38e12 = .658e-6 g/m2
Besides the notion of accommodating a free-falling item arriving at 30 km/s (keeping in mind that this is not my suggesting that probes would survive such speed of impact), though what if there were to be a lunar jet-stream/headwind of 30 km/s, as such it would most likely be represented as flowing near the surface, whereas the kinetic energy of KE=.5MV2 starts becoming somewhat interesting. Excluding any notions of solar wind along with whatever influx of debris, of excluding upon other cosmic dust of any sort, as well as of meteorite kicked up moon-dirt that would add a great deal of insult to injury, and if we just focused upon what the raw 25 tonnes worth of that atmosphere has to work with;
Thus 25 tonnes worth of atmosphere re-interprets as KE = .329e-6 * 900e6 = 296 joules/m2
And at 100 tonnes of atmosphere is interpreted as KE = 1.316e-6 * 900e6 = 1184 joules/m2
One perfectly viable conjecture supporting upon why Venus has retained so much atmosphere while situated closer to the sun is having to do with the extremely slow rotation of the planet, however the upper portion of it's atmosphere is anything but rotating slowly. Thus again that begs to ask why our moon which rotates roughly four times faster than Venus but still that's relatively slow with respect to Earth, never the less the moon is supposedly nearly devoid of almost any amount of atmosphere while situated within the most ideal zone of life as we know it. I might have thought that our moon would otherwise have retained an atmosphere of CO2 at least 1/36th(0.028 bar) that of Earth, unless our moon was that of an intruder that may have once upon a time exceeded 300 km/s in order to escape the original environment (possibly the Sirius star system and even somewhat closely related to Sirius/c), plus having traveled a slight interstellar portion of a light year while managing to survive while trekking itself through various colliding Oort and Kuiper zones of debris that could easily have punished the lunar surface environment to a fairlywell, as well as summarily excavated the majority of whatever else wasn't nailed down, only to becoming eventually captured by the gravity of our solar system until that of Earth took final possession (leaving Sirius/c to fend for itself), of which Earth still represents somewhat of a persistent energy draw upon the lunar resources, especially after each significant storm of whatever impacts the moon is where yet another portion of whatever's was sufficiently displaced ends up arriving on Earth and/or absorbed into Earth's atmosphere, much like the sodium debris and gas that nearly every year is kicked up by meteor showers and subsequently trails the moon by greater than 900,000 km, of which Earth travels itself through such debris and clouds of gas better than a dozen times each year.
The alternative understanding is that our moon simply never had the basics for sustaining an O2 atmosphere to start with, arriving somewhat late into the scheme of things as we've perceived, though as some of the oldest history having suggested upon a time without a moon, and ever since has consistently lost nearly as much as it gains in the way of whatever panspermia and of other collected elements due mostly to the solar winds that at times can exceed 1,200 km/s, whereas otherwise displaced shards and substance vaporised into gas from meteorite impacts and the subsequent gravity assimilation of heavier elements, otherwise losing substance by way of mother Earth pulling way at whatever becomes free of the lunar gravity, whereas it's possible to imagine the near Vacuum of as little as 3e-15 bar to be the case even though I'm still thinking such an amount of extreme vacuum is somewhat unlikely since heavier atoms must exist that should not have blown nor been extracted away, and since there's been absolutely nothing other than NASA/Apollo of interactive instrumentation telling us this data, and that NASA/Apollo still has every reason in their perpetrated cold-war world as to lie their stinking butts off, or else.
Even though the moon clearly represents 1/6th the gravity influence of Earth, and is obviously situated within the very same preferred (ideal) zone of life environment as Earth, oddly (still unexplained and of otherwise of moderated data that's according solely to whatever sustains the NASA/Apollo ruse) the moon somehow managed to have lost nearly all of it's collective atmospheric elements (including many of the heavy surface-hugging elements of O2, CO2, Argon and perhaps a little Xenon none the less), and apparently of just about everything else you can imagine was either never there to begin with or has flown the coop billions of years ago. With a surface ratio of supposedly as great as 150e12:1 fewer atoms/cm3 than Earth, and of merely 3e-15 bar being somewhat low on pressure to boot, seems almost too good to be true for accommodating the efforts of items in need of intentionally traveling extremely fast towards impacting with the lunar surface, as well as extremely fast and thereby efficient as for anything having to travel anywhere throughout the near absolute vacuum of getting between any two lunar surface locations offers a friction of zero, as equally per results of whatever meteor and dust-bunny impacts sending off secondary shards that are capable of being physically launched entirely away from the influence of gravity, thus it's moonsuit leathal as all get-out being anywhere within kilometers of almost any impact, and otherwise absolute mega-tonnes worth of moon-rock is upon Earth (as where else did it go?).
Of course, since honest folks haven't had the benefit of anything interactive affording a second opinion upon whatever is lunar, much less an actual physical and thus calibrated robotic instrument of independent readings while during and ever since our supposedly accomplishing those multiple tours upon the moon in person, of which our NASA/Apollo folks obviously had to recreate those Kodak moments due to all of the irreversible damage inflicted upon the Kodak film that was taken along for the ride, and since it's hard to imagine that any moon of the sort of mass and having been residing within the near ideal survival zone of our solar system as seemingly so absolutely dissolute, and yet otherwise we've been informed that the EVA aspects offered little worse than of our thinly clad moonsuit folks taking a walk through Central Park in broad daylight (whereas Central Park at night has clearly been established as more lethal than our moon).
It also seems so entirely odd that there could have been photographic recordings from orbit of lunar cloud like features being derived from such few atoms, and otherwise having so much sodium dust and vapor becoming available from the Leonid Meteor impacts which subsequently created the sorts of secondary trail of debris that resulted in releasing energy by way of launching so much tonnage off the moon, so much so that out of such a near vacuum is derived the sodium element which the moon/Earth velocity and solar wind extracted such detectable amounts away by more than 900,000 km, which leaves me into wondering about the likes of CO2, Argon, Neon and/or Xenon as being lost somewhere within that same opportunity. Of course, I've been arguing all along that for humans and even of robotic technology surviving upon the moon is downright testy whenever much more than a 2 mg dust-bunny arrives (that's supposedly of somewhat greater mass than the vast bulk of the Leonid meteor debris) which only becomes further attracted and thereby accelerated by gravity and of there supposedly being hardly .658e-6 g/m2 worth of atmospheric buffer isn't that much of anything affording a measurable degree worth of terminal velocity.
Recent HST UV observations indicate that Europa has a substantial O2 atmosphere with column 2.4 to 14e14 cm-2, thus clearly Europa being of a lesser moon than ours, that's clearly situated nowhere within the zone of life as we've known it, and being clearly planted nextdoor to the rather monstrous suck-everything possible away planet of Jupiter, is never the less still doing just fine and dandy when it comes down to affording a slight bit of terminal velocity due to retaining an atmosphere. Accommodating better than a 1e-11 bar environment of O2 as opposed to our moon's pathetic 3e-15 bar of supposedly insignificant if any O2.
Titan's atmosphere may resemble that of Earth when life began to form here. This merely offers yet another example of where there's been a moon hosting an atmosphere, and of ours having squat, whereas the available pressure on Titan had been calculated as 1.5 bars, and to note that even though Titan isn't all that much greater than the mass of our moon, it's atmosphere extends roughly ten times further than Earth's atmosphere. So once again, what gives with our moon?
All objects in space are complex products entirely of whatever's been collected and/or assimilated if need be via terraforming (though always including a little DNA via panspermia), if anything it seems that our moon (especially if it was created as merely 60 million years after Earth, as being continually promoted by way of those NASA approved infomercials) should have become nearly as benefited by an atmosphere as Titan, even though it seems proper that ours should be considerably warmer and as such offering patterns of weather to boot, especially since it's supposedly been within the very same collection zone of life as Earth. Of course the odds of the spendy NASA approved notion that our moon was created from that of a happenstance of whatever impacted Earth isn't entirely impossible, though seemingly becoming somewhat a load of horsepucky or much worse since the natural process of collection on behalf of sustaining life has managed to entirely bypass the moon altogether.
It's quite apparent, if we excluded upon whatever was NASA/Apollo surface related that's been recorded as fact, as such there's actually damn little we know for certain, much less first hand, as in essentially nothing physical other than what the Russians claim but perhaps not cold-war surprisingly they also can not establish upon the required robotic capability as of today, and not that mega-tonnes of moon rock doesn't already exist upon Earth (as where the hell elsewhere would such impact shards have gone?), and of otherwise darn little other as obtained via satellite missions, other than photographs taken from orbit that reaffirms upon the 11% reflective nature of the average terrain (rather than the near 55% as portrayed by so many of the Apollo missions), and of a few such images suggesting cloud-like substances drifting about that puts the scientific squeeze upon establishing further proof for the task of substantiating upon those previous notions of the lunar atmosphere density being of merely 2e11 atoms/m3.
Until new instruments suggest otherwise, the atmospheric/atomic density of the moon being the near vacuum that's been reported as representing 150e12 less population than Earth isn't going to compute into any significant factor of terminal velocity. Whereas atom per atom the Earth baseball Vt of 42 m/s might thereby suggest upon an impossible lunar Vt that's 42 * 150e12 = 63e14 m/s, or even if we took the square root of that as being 7.94e7 m/s seems hardly obtainable. Obviously, since that sort of Vt is still not even remotely possible, thus a great deal of something other must be getting in our way, if not there being a great many atoms simply unaccounted for, whereas perhaps those trillions upon trillions of photons per atom is representing the culprit of one's demise for even approaching the infamous 3e8 m/s (edge of Earth or perhaps edge of the universe sort of barrier imposed by Einstein). Thus it seems that speed alone is not so much the problem as is running into stuff, such as whatever few atoms are not going to be easily deflected, and those trillions upon trillions of photons collected into "dark-mater" or perhaps "dark-energy" could become just as lethal at any rate of advancement much above 10%"c". Thus a shock-wave or energy pathway as created by a waveguide of photons spinning an alignment of atoms might clear a path by way of aligning whatever few atoms into a conduit or waveguide rather than a random mumble jumble of happenstance that simply isn't going to step aside at your beckon command.
Clearly of what's needed on behalf of understanding the lunar environment is a reasonably broad multi-spectrum laser cannon of relatively low energy that's robotically situated upon the moon (pointed directly at Earth), whereas readings from Earth or via Earth satellites can be compared to the actual lunar surface readings of those same beams of specific spectrums of light as it's utilized to somewhat decode upon the lunar atmosphere, thus on behalf of general science and even of Earth science should that data become associated with the next round of lunar explorations offers a win-win, as relating to yet another understanding of what's affecting Earth's global warming. This sort of relatively simple instrument deployments isn't even physically large nor all that complex, and certainly not the least bit spendy compared to just about anything Mars or Mercury that offers us squat worth of new Earth science nor other measurable benefits for humanity, at least that couldn't have been accomplish on far less than 10% and without 1% the pollution impact of our doing the likes of Mars and Mercury.
On behalf of another probe doing Venus, obviously the notions of "Terminal Velocity(Vt)" are almost hydrodynamically obscene, as in having roughly 100 fold greater atmospheric density worth of atoms/m3 represents that said baseball might be rather sluggish. The nighttime density at the surface becoming the superior density of roughly 10% that of water is suggesting upon a viscosity of atmospheric soup that might understandably suggest 0.42 m/s as being the Vt of that baseball, that is until you factor in the 90.5% gravity and perhaps a little something extra for a factor of buoyancy could be making that Vt = .38 m/s if not less, and as for an notions of body surfing your way to the ground via skydiving is perhaps down to 0.32 m/s * .905 = 0.29 m/s, thus don't actually need any stinking parachute, just some thermally insulating jump-suit and perhaps a spare kw worth of air conditioning to boot. Of course the lesser gravity being 90.5% and the rather nifty buoyancy of 65+kg/m3 that should only increase in the season of nighttime at least 68 kg/m3 if not nearly 72 kg/m3 is almost certainly imposing a negative free-fall factor if your inflated jump-suit becomes worth 2 m3, as such you'd eventually decelerate to that of a floating body instead of ever setting a hot foot upon the nighttime surface, especially if having to offset the 136 kg worth of buoyancy, meaning that as a fully outfitted skydiver of 332 Earth pounds you'd still be neutral untill you pulled the plug of your jump-suit so as to get rid of some of the volume of whatever gas (presumably 99% H2 and perhaps at most 1% O2) that's keeping your feet off the ground.
At this point I'm not even going to get this page into the notions of what terrific sorts of accomplishments a composite structured ridged airship could easily manage as cruising through the crystal clear atmospheric ocean of what Venus has to offer, as that's even more so embarrassing that such capability has been entirely overlooked by our all-knowing wizards for so many decades.
Before they (NASA/NSA/DoD or perhaps DHS) started shutting my internet access down, by way of their cutting into my links, thus slowing everything I've needed to accomplish down to a crawl, and of course continually infecting my computer with everything nasty they've got to toss at me. In spite of all of that cloak and dagger flak, I've located upon some basic information on the maximum rate or velocity of traveling through space, as for an effort of somewhat establishing upon the SVt(terminal velocity of space travel), that is of real interest if not concern of folks that might care to give such limitation of speed through space a name that's associated with whatever notions of terminal velocity(Vt).
Consider the square root of "c" being 1.73e8 as representing the absolute maximum physical Speed Of Advance(SOA) per our frame of existence. However, if the frame within which you're traveling is already moving in the desired direction, and/or of the few atoms aligned as FIFO nodes so as to benefit your SOA, then what's keeping us or at least our photons from surpassing "c" by a very large factor?
NOTE; Apparently the lower 99.9% of Earth's populous (the apparent scum of the Earth) isn't supposed to become the least bit concerned with such terminal velocity related issues, as only the upper most 0.1% of Earth's populous (NASA certified wizards) are supposedly the one and only all-knowing sorts encharge of such important matters. Whereas this is also like how the scum of the Earth (of which I'm part of) isn't supposed to be the least bit concerned about global warming and the subsequent increase in storm intensities and many other lethal aspects, or as to notions of interplanetary travel nor of anything on behalf of interplanetary and thus inter-species communication skills, and that's inclusive of the fact that even though the vast majority of life upon this planet communicates primarily via interpreting photons, whereas actually you and I seem to interpret a few terabytes/second worth of such photons as into visual images and/or text of all things, yet my esteemed opponents opposing absolutely everything under their sun are telling us village idiots to shut-up and accept the fact that firstly we're absolutely all alone in this vast universe, and secondly, if that weren't the case that only those most likely heathen like ETs having a full grasp and applied technology towards only our primitive notions of RF/microwave forms of receiving and transmitting such communications are going to worth squat. Silly me, I guess I actually didn't know that.
How fast is fast enough
According to the published words of what's NASA approved; The slowest of meteors associated with our frame of existence manage to travel along at 11.2 km/s (actually some of those are essentially standing nearly still while we manage to run ourselves into them at 30+km/s), whereas the fastest at 71.5 km/s is entirely relative to our +/- 30 km/s, and/or that of our entire solar system that's traveling along as well as through the nearby expanse of the Milky Way at 224 km/s relative to the frames of other such galaxies. For an example; it takes that fastest meteor about 90 minutes as to travel (beeline) from our moon to the Earth (+/- a few Vt factors that relate to atmospheres and that of the influence of gravity).
71.5 km/s = .02385% the speed of light (if that's inclusive of our 30 km/s = a closing SOA of 101.5 km/s or 0.0295%"c"), and as such it's obviously quite capable of impacting and/or displacing it's way along through a substance of something that's keeping a lid upon the Leonid Vt, while continually shedding off loads of matter like a stuck pig. Of course, supposedly Earth and our trusty moon is moving about the sun at 30 km/s, as well as through the greater expanse of space at roughly 224 km/s, and even that's supposedly at a rate that's 14 km/s different or offset than of the vast community of what the Milky Way is traveling at, and of which the 224 km/s isn't even 0.1% light speed. thus it's clear if your spacecraft had it's own method of sufficient surrounding mass that was associated with a good deal of central mass, such as in a manner of creating a truly horrific magnetosphere which extends out to creating some ungodly Oort zone, as then traveling along at 224 km/s is obviously something that's doable without otherwise becoming unglued.
I'm thinking that perhaps 0.1% light speed isn't the maximum of interstellar terminal velocity, as I believe that I've learned of other galaxies capable of moving physical substances along at nearly 600 km/s in relationship to any number of other such items of interest. Although, there's been nothing of physical substance thus far recorded as managing 1% light speed, which gives me the notion that perhaps 1% LS is getting the understanding of SVt a bit closer to whatever the natural Vt of open space represents, and that's somewhat regardless of how much applied energy. Thereby of notions for exceeding this 1% LS seems a bit tricky and downright pesky for that of avoiding running yourself into much of anything. So, without your spaceship becoming a glowing cloud of gas, or of some UV/a spectrum of pure energy/force field, chances are that 1% LS is about as good as it gets.
However, if we so much as created our nifty go-anywhere as we damn well please spacecraft that's capable of traveling at even 0.1%"c" (at most 300 km/s), as such for our substantial size of spacecraft being perhaps 1000 m3, whereas such we'd most likely light up the universe by 4.2 times that of the Leonid meteor that's recorded as 71.5 km/s, as that's because our spacecraft and of whatever collected debris is traveling at nearly 4.2 times faster, thus the KE=.5MV2 formula somewhat translates into a required energy level that is squared to whatever's moving through space at merely 71.5 km/s would have to become 17.64 times as great (as to how many extra terawatts that represents I'm not at all certain). Though in spite of my persistent errors in math, and the fact that you probable already know all there is to know, whereas for other still sufficiently dumbfounded you'll simply need to trust me, as I fear that 0.1%c isn't going to cut it, and perhaps not even 1% light speed, whereas the notion of achieving 10%"c" is eventually getting us somewhere that's sufficiently important, though perhaps our having to arrive in bits and pieces due to running ourselves into nasty stuff at 10% light speed (30,000 km/s) isn't going to be any stinking "walk in the park", where a milligram worth of iron or surely of much of anything other that's tougher than ice is going to deliver quite a punch.
Thus perhaps instead of our focusing upon roasting other batches of astronauts, while seriously polluting mother Earth in the process, to the tune of hundreds of billions that would be required of any such deep-space expeditions, or perhaps even the likes of folks spending a few days on Mars getting all of their DNA summarily sub-frozen, TBI upon their DNA/RNA being sliced and diced as well as easily pulverised by just about anything that comes along, my silly notions of folks merely establishing laser cannon beams as photon waveguides, upon which the likes of Dr. Wang's 310X quantum packets of FTLS data packets can be expedited out towards far away places, as possibly even amplifying and expediting those as a packet tunneling conduit or series of photonic transponders might otherwise accomplish, such as photons going to/from Sirius could become just the ticket, though unfortunately at not 0.1% the investment of our doing one of those Mars rover probes, and of hardly creating another artificial tonne worth of nasty CO2 for mother Earth to digest.
Of course for starters, we could try out something that's a bit more of a local area code, such as upon communicating with the likes of Venus. At least upon them relatively cool nighttime clouds of Venus that in spots offers an opacity worth <25% at certain spectrums (400~425 nm), or perhaps at least 10% at the somewhat more visible spectrums (425~450 nm), and of folks efficiently delivering such a stream of coded bits in the form of light would enable us to safely and efficiently initiate the packet calls, and of subsequently having any number of other pre-existing instruments detecting upon what if anything transpires in the form of a reply. Although since our all-knowing NASA has frequently published upon excluding anything that's alive and kicking from ever existing upon Venus in the first place, and even if such were possible, those forms of life would apparently have to be sub-heathen at best, thereby no such reply would ever transpire. But that's OK because, I have a relatively inexpensive communications kiosk that's fully interactive and as such can be effectively deployed, as for landing itself upon the Guth Venus Interplanetary Airport as per what's clearly depicted as already existing, whereas we can utilize our most primitive forms of sign languages, or perhaps a Klingon body language and of impressive grunts, and/or smoke signals if need be, in order to communicate with such heathens.
Back into the prime topic on the speed limits of physical things;
It seems the above statement isn't necessarily offering the whole truth, as obviously if two items are in fact on a mutual head-on course of impending collision, as such their various individual speeds do in fact add up. At least from any standpoint or frame of our existence, and/or of otherwise being situated upon the moon represent but +/- 1 km/s, whereas either of these frames are traveling at roughly 30+km/s about our sun, and if something were to be arriving as counter-clockwise to our existing course, as such the 71.5 km/s and of our closing 30+km/s are in fact going to become 101.5+km/s (the + factor being of whatever the minimal time spent while being further influenced the mutual gravity of these two items in question). Unfortunately, much of the following portion is of outdated material, and as such needs to become revised, although any halfwit fool essentially knows that I'm trying to convey upon the very same notions as above.
So far, most everything on record (including quantum strings and thus photons that are nearly-resting or not) offers a degree of mass (perhaps mostly as in the form of energy), whereas others have suggested that even a near perfect vacuum is supposedly capable of containing as many as 1e9/m3 worth of various atoms (somehow the moon having 1/6th Earth gravity and plently of life giving solar influx holds onto merely 2e11 atoms/m3), down to perhaps as few as 1e6/m3 that's within the nullification zone between us and the Sirius star system, along with trillions upon trillions of photons and/or EM waves as represently extremely low frequency photons passing through the very same space time continuum (suggesting that there's quite a little of just about everything still resides within every m3 of the near vacuum of space, or perhaps of whatever space has to offer as "dark-matter" or as "dark-energy"). Perhaps within the most devoid expanse or nullification zone that's situated between significant other galaxies is where there could be less than the 1e6 atoms/m3 (although is physically possible but somewhat highly unlikely of there being as little as one such atom/m3 that's otherwise surrounded by all of those trillions upon trillons of nearly resting photons).
If we're intending upon making that headway of 10%"c", that which seems to be suggesting a lot of potential substance as to bucking our way through (of mostly having to move/displace all of those nasty atoms as well as those trillions upon trillions of photons/atom our of our way, not to even mention religiously avoid various physical debris such as to be found throughout expansive Oort zones), as if our 1000 m3 spacecraft rate of advance were having to survive while displacing itself through this soup of the day, week and multiple years worth at the relative velocity of 3e7 m/s becomes a task of diverting 3e10 m3/s as for somehow making this 10%"c"(3e7 km/s) without ever once running ourselves into much of anything whatsoever is going to be a rather neat trick.
Whereas a nearby moon like ours representing the surface area of 38e12 m2 (volume of 22e18 m3) of which that rough surface area and associated gravity might further suggest imposing upon itself a perfectly natural terminal velocity barrier or speed limit of less than 0.1% LS, unless the energy as to drive something that enormous were absolutely unlimited, plus folks going along for the ride having everything situated on the lunar deck as extremely well secured. Whereas currently having to travel along with its companion planet(Earth) at 30+km/s (+/- 1 km/s) where there's simply not enough velocity nor substance within what's surrounding our moon in order to jet-stream blast whatever wasn't nailed down off the deck, though perhaps of pushing the moon 100 times faster should have easily accomplished that trick. Without the side benefit of my having a good stellar motion and CRAY super-computer, I'm thinking that the required velocity of our moon having to originally break ranks with the likes of Sirius/ab may have required at the very least a momentum of perhaps 300 km/s (0.1%c), and much like the sorts of surface debris house cleaning that transpires upon other sufficiently fast moving but less gravity capable asteroids, whereas such they've manage to lose most all of their available debris at something well below 100 km/s.
I seem to recall others, usually bashing upon anything I have to offer, though supposedly vastly smarter than myself, stipulating that the fastest moving items of any measurable mass have been those recorded as making roughly 600 km/s, and of not much other than a supernovae event was capable of generating physical gas like substances of anything much faster. This mention of 600 km/s seems to suggest there may actually be such a terminal velocity aspect of physical space travel, whereas the smaller the javelin like probe the better off as for such having to bash its way through fewer atoms and thereby creating a bow shock-wave and subsequently taking the least energy, much like photons are relatively small and thereby easily sustain nearly light speed without losing much if any of their initial energy signature (as either photons get through or they don't if they've managed to smash into even one atom along the way, which sort of makes me believe that perhaps photons are more or less conducting by way of FIFO atomic nodes handing off every packet rather than actually forcing photons to travel). It's recently been proven that photons can be slowed and even stopped dead in their tracks, plus Dr. Wang seems to have introduced a 310 fold speed increase upon an established photon waveguide, where as the slowed photon waveguide and of the intended packet shared the very same environment, of course that which GR/SR and even a few diehard QM folks only agree as to disagree upon such results being entirely of meaningless dribble.
The God Particle as that being a Quantum Photon
Perhaps those laws of photon physics are about to change before our dumbfounded eyes, and thereby hopefully alter our lives for the better, as at least said photons can manage to find their way through the gauntlet of space without losing too much of their original energy/mass and thereby deliver nearly the same as their original energy signature which is also representing a degree of energy which can be converted into mass (at least the likes of diatoms seem to convert such photon energy into mass all the time), and this is especially important since there's trillions upon trillions of photons than atoms that must coexist, or else. Thus my quest to discovering of what's most important; the atom (at most 1e100 atoms in the known universe) or the vast greater numbers of photons (perhaps God only knows how many)?
Skydiving upon Venus is a real drag
From the research of what others accomplished, I understand that the terminal velocity of a 100 kg (220 lb) skydiver upon Mars is roughly capable of obtaining 725 mph (324 m/s), as opposed to a maximum of 125 mph (56 m/s) free-fall near sealevel and of obtaining a parachute deceleration to perhaps a 0.1 m/s soft landing as upon Earth, or perhaps that of a 10 m/s semi-soft landing upon Mars having a parachute that's roughly in need of being ten fold larger or 100 fold greater in order to obtain the 1 m/s rate of final arrival. On the other hand, of the Venus skydiving terminal velocity when taking into account the mostly CO2 instead of the wossy O2/N2 of Earth = 1.5:1, the 65+kg/m3 as opposed to the 1.22 kg/m3 of Earth = 54:1, and the 90.5% gravity makes for the near surface Vt of Venus as being roughly as little as 0.62 m/s. Adding an inflated jumpsuit to that and account for the physical displacement of subsequent positive buoyancy and there's a wee bit of a problem, in that you'll never set a hot foot upon Venus unless you're packing along some of that melted lead that everyone keeps harping about.
This following was one of my original estimates of the Venus terminal velocity(Vt);
It seems there's been something rather fascinating to being said for the terminal velocity of the Venus atmosphere, especially since I believe it's offering at least 66 times more slug/ft3 value depending upon day or nighttime. I'm not exactly suggesting upon the notion of folks skydiving, but as otherwise for researching into aerodynamic factors, whereas this aspect alone is almost too good to pass up, where a reentry shuttle/rigid-airship configuration could become just the ticket to hell, as in stowing away and/or deflating whatever wings (if any) as one penetrates those nasty but relatively cool nighttime clouds, then relying solely upon the terrific buoyancy by way of introducing either a simple vacuum or that of any number of common gases capable of floating (such as N2/O2) that are essentially going to be much lighter than the surrounding atmosphere as you descend, whereas H2 or perhaps just that of pulling a vacuum is not only offering the utmost buoyancy/m3, but where any amount of H2 remains as perfectly safe as such technology ever gets. The notion of a rigid airship operating from whatever it's buoyancy requirements as based upon vacuum isn't entirely out of the question, especially as for those entering from outer space where there's already a terrific vacuum to being had at essentially zero applied energy, and if the craft is of basalt/silica composite that's incorporating a good matrix of thermally suitable binders, as such there's absolutely no structural limitations upon sustaining that vacuum, and not of any factor whatsoever of there being corrosion to deal with, especially if all the external ports are fully secured until the craft has transferred sufficiently below the cloud deck, where it's dry as a bone and still relatively cool as cruising calmly while remaining sufficiently below them nighttime clouds.
Composites of basalt and silica, plus various ceramic or zirconia binders seems to have entirely eliminated whatever notions of technical difficulties pertaining to nearly any amount heat, as well as pressure differentials, and where even the most potentially acidic corrosion isn't the slightest factor, and upon arriving below them clouds is where absolutely nothing corrodes once you're calmly cruising sufficiently below the relatively cool nighttime season of said clouds, as this is where your craft is capable of operating almost like a high-speed submarine that just so happens to fly quite nicely, while efficiently cruising along at 10+km while having nearly 50 times the buoyancy/m3 as what the Hindenburg offered, and of obtaining better than 70 times whenever cruising anywhere near the nighttime deck. Remember to calculate for the increase in nighttime density, especially as things cool off and you obtain altitude where it's even cooler yet, though your airship buoyancy gas could remain every bit as toasty warm as need be, whereas only while on the surface might the buoyancy gas be allowed to thermally equalize and/or become intentionally somewhat cooler than of what's surrounding (remember there no shortage of easily available energy upon Venus, which makes for doing such things another done deal). And do remember that such energy isn't even hardly a complex factor, as besides the vertical pressure differential of 4+bar/km which may derive gigawatts of kinetic energy on demand, you're otherwise surrounded by all the pre-heated CO2 you can possibly manage to process into -->CO/O2. That factor plus whatever a little H2O2 and possibly a touch of C12H26 as derived from local geological resources might enable a great deal of applied energy to being taken on demand, all of which having been derived from your local surroundings, which certainly beats our having to import such amounts of energy, as would have to be the case for absolutely anything Mars.
Skydiving the likes of Mars; this tricky adventure offers it's rather thin atmosphere (0.007 atm, less than 1% of what Earth has to work with) consisting mainly of crystal clear but damn cold CO2. Assuming same values of area and a modified drag coefficient as for earth, we must compensate for the lesser density, temperature and weight for the corresponding Martian values. A reasonable approximation would be to multiply the 0.002378 slugs/ft3 as maximum for Earth by .007 (p mars / p earth) x 1.54 (density CO2 / density air) x 283ºK / 210ºK (Earth temp/Mars temp), resulting in: P mars = 0.00003428 slugs/ft3, whereas applying this into the calculator as provided by this following link should yield the various terminal velocities, though somewhat embarrassingly fast terminal veloscity to say the least (this calculator even seems to apply for going buoyant, as in upwards, of which you can't hardy do squat worth of such buoyancy on Mars).
Instead of our doing Mars for another trillion or so hard earned bucks, plus another couple of wasted decades, Venus seems to have been offering us way more than it's fair share of all those nifty atmospheric advantages, as in being nearly hydrodynamic. Even though I've been known to unintentionally skew some of the math on the positive behalf of those "what if" factors, perhaps your expertise can be bothered as to plug-in whatever variables and inform us village idiots of what's what. Since the Earth atmospheric temperature standard of 283ºK seems a bit low for our daytime environment, and perhaps not low enough for nighttime, and there's certainly the terrific shift in the available density of 4+bar/km as you approach the surface of Venus being yet another real nuisance if you wanted to go fast, that plus the final -10°K/km of thermal consideration could be considered by some folks as yet another damn nuisance, unless of course you're trying to extract a few GW worth of kinetic energy. So, perhaps there's even the sorts of better information that'll yield those polished results that critics opposing other life, as well as opposing other intelligence other than their own, so often insist upon such expertise before they'll budge an inch off that Apollo space toilet.
Here's yet another one of my pesky efforts (probably still unintentionally in error) as based upon the U.S. units of standard atmosphere = 0.002378 slugs per cubic foot at ground zero (Earth).
Venus @92 Bar and 720ºK
.002378 * 92 * 1.54 * 283/720 = .1324
daytime P Venus = 0.1324 slugs/ft3
Venus @92 Bar and 650ºK
.002378 * 92 * 1.54 * 283/650 = .1466
nighttime P Venus = 0.1466 slugs/ft3
(of course, I do believe those nighttime Bars should also have increased by at least 5%)
Pd Venus = 0.1324 slugs/ft3
Pd Earth = 0.002378 slugs/ft3 Viscosity = 0.0000179 kg/m*s
Pd Mars = 0.0000343 slugs/ft3 = .08397835/m3
Venus/Earth slugs = .1324/.002378 = 56.7:1 (daytime)
Venus/Earth slugs = .1466/.002425 = 60.5:1 (nighttime)
Once again; Mars clearly offers that rather thin (0.007 atm) atmosphere consisting mainly of CO2.
Assuming upon same values of area and drag coefficient as for earth, we must compensate for the density, temperature and weight for the corresponding Martian values. A reasonable approximation would be to multiply the 0.002378 slugs/ft3 as maximum for Earth by .007 (p mars / p earth) x 1.54 (density CO2 / density air) x 283ºK / 210ºK (Earth temp/Mars temp), resulting in: P mars = 0.00003428 slugs/ft3, whereas applying this into the web based calculator as provided by this following link should yield the various terminal velocities, though revealing upon a somewhat fast terminal velocity to say the least (this calculator even seems to apply for taking matter buoyant, as in upwards, of which you can't hardy do squat worth of buoyancy on Mars).
The raw formulas should help us to further establish the Vt of Venus, though I seem to keep running myself somewhat amuck without even trying, and usualy of others claiming as being so much smarter than myself don't want to bother with offering their corrected math, as supposedly in that way we can continue along with their plans of roasting yet other batch or two of astronauts, and of otherwise playing our button-pushing cloak and dagger games on behalf of those cold-war NSA/DoD agendas, as well as for the likes of protecting Henry Kissinger (Dr. Death) along with the likes of Halburton and a few other bastards sucking up to our resident warlord. So, if that be the case, perhaps you should accomplish your own math, as well as obtain and wear your own full-body flak suit.
.002378 * p * 1.54 * 283/t = slugs/ft3
p = Bars
air mas/m3 * 1.54 = CO2 density
Earth standard temp 283/t
day temp compensation 283/720 = .393
nighttime temp comp. 276/650 = .425
Mars g = 12.54 ft/sec/sec = 3.822 m/s
P mars = 0.00003428 slugs/ft3
Earth g = 32.14 ft/sec/sec = 9.796 m/s
P earth = 0.00236 slugs/ft3
Venus g = 28.22 ft/sec/sec = 8.6 m/s
.002378 * 92 * 1.54 * 283/720 = .1324
daytime P venus = 0.1324 slugs/ft3
.002378 * 92 * 1.54 * 283/650 = .1466
nighttime P venus = 0.1466 slugs/ft3
In a few more of my testy words of wisdom; the likes of Venus is simply NOT the sort of place for sustaining such absolutely dumbfounded, thus stupid and much less on behalf of such intellectually bigoted Earth humans, and quite clearly I've never once suggested otherwise (other than in jest), especially of accommodating such absolutely pathetically dumb and dumber sorts of snookered folks that seem to prefer sucking up to their next tax dollar rebate, and of accepting upon whatever mainstream intellectual flatulence no matters what immoral agenda and/or implications of ulterior motives exist, and/or of the continued carnage becomes associated (that's including for every billion upon billions being wasted on non-Earth related science and especially upon such absolutely non-humanly obtainable goals, whereas this continuing wastage of talents and resources clearly represents that per billions blown further insures that yet another million folks must prematurely expire, as in one way or another their having to die off because those billions weren't attributing any actual worth towards the honest welfare of humanity, and of no matters how they "Arthur Andersen" spend and try to butt-wag and justify yet another billion upon the likes of Mars, that which simply isn't benefitting other than perhaps 0.1% of mostly Earth's upper most class of population, of which generally do not share their wealth with others than folks of their own kind). As it seems, unless you're actually another unusually smart sort of individual, Venus simply isn't ever going to become your second home sweet home, perhaps not even as EVA survival suit worthy, not that any of those decent Venus Cathar Lizard folk would likely appreciate having your inferior DNA/RNA running amuck on their planet.
However, if in spite of good judgment, as for the task of setting yourself up to be living upon Venus, in spite of whatever I've advised against as for doing such, thereby showing your absolute lack of common morality and totally devoid of common sense without remorse (actually there's not all that much new about the humanity of Earth being within that category), and even though the pressure is great, and there's extremely low amounts of free O2 and even considerable heat, those issues I believe can become compensated and/or adjusted to, whereas this "life upon Venus" task for a mere human might become somewhat like planning to survive the rest of your natural life within the confines of a well insulated nuclear submarine, such as of one that's never leaving the greatest depths of our oceans. And guess what? Most of us wouldn't likely make it past the first year without killing each other off. Placing the likes of a Pope and a Cathar onboard wouldn't get past the first day, and the same goes for a number of Jews and of almost any alternative faith. It's almost as though we've become genetically deevolved into hosting a thoroughly mutated/bigoted intellectual DNA as having been programmed for containing a predisposition of trying to outdue and/or kill-off one another from birth. In other words, it's not at all that uncommon that we've eaten our own kind, especially if there's any chance of another grant or tax dollar funded program at stake.
Sorry about that previous rant.
The following has been extracted mostly from: http://venus44.freeyellow.com/
"The mean equatorial radius of Venus is 6,051.84 kilometers (3,758.19 miles) nearly 0.95 of Earth's. The planet's lowest point is about 6,048.0 kilometers (3,756.0 miles) from the planet's center, and the highest point, Maxwell Montes, is 6,062.57 kilometers (3,764.85 miles)."
"Gravitational acceleration on Venus is 88% that of the Earth."
"The pressure varies from 45 bars at the highest elevations, to about 92 bars at mean radius, to that of 119 bars at the lowest points. Its mean distance from the Sun is 0.723 AU"
"Venus is closest to Earth, about 41.4 million kilometers (25 million miles) away the darkened disk subtends about 64 seconds of arc." That's slightly more than 100 times the maximum distance to our moon.
"Wind speeds can be 1 to 2 meters per second (that's 2 to 5 miles per hour though usually less than 1 mph) at the surface. Zonal, east-to-west winds are about 10 meters per second (22 miles per hour) at an altitude of 10 kilometers (6 miles) and 100 meters per second (220 miles per hour) at altitudes of from 50 to 100 kilometers (30 to 60 miles). Pioneer Venus probe data suggest that wind speeds are highest at about 60 degrees latitude."
As somewhat intentionally under reported, and thereby under appreciated; An extremely slow rotation makes their seasons of daytime/nighttime each worth 2918 hours, and of their thermally conductive atmosphere as essentially providing a rather nifty surround that's offering an ocean like substance that's reported as mostly CO2 @96.5%, and N2 @3.5%, which obviously accomplishes a damn fine job of convecting and otherwise conducting absolutely every influx watt of energy and then some back out into space, and that's certainly one heck of a lot of energy transference taking place, as in easily accommodating twice that of Earth. Wheras being @92+Bars on the deck (increasing that factor by 5~10% for nighttime), and otherwise Venus is supposedly too humanly damn hot and nasty all the time, and as such being continually touted almost as though that's all that matters.
We need to remember of all life on Earth, as well as all geological associated energies are the sole product of those solar photons, as in accommodating such radiation energy conversions, and then gravitational and tidal forces come into play, whereas without the sun, and no matters how many moons or even how big those moons are, life as we know it upon Earth wouldn't get itself past go, as there'd be so damn little if any available resource for extracting energy that's situated below the surface, so darn little that even a cost plus technological "all out" approach to a planet like Mars wouldn't hardly become worth squat. Essentially, without the sun, Earth simply wouldn't have become as worthy as our moon for living upon. Mars has certainly offered the necessary proof positive that mere sunlight/starlight simply isn't sufficient, unless that star were to be of Sirius/abc as we're cruising past within 0.1 ly (preferably within 0.01 LY), as otherwise a solar system that holds onto planets within the zone of life isn't hardly an optional requirement, that is unless you've got loads of artificial energy to burn, and perhaps something like a interstellar traveling moon having a toasty core plus those sufficiently massive geode like pockets within the crust as to store and utilize whatever.
Portions of the Venus cloud zone offers a relatively wet (25%~33% H2O) matrix of sulfuric acid(H2SO4) and plain old water, plus supposedly another nasty degree of nitrosylsulfuric acid (NOHSO4), as them there cool nighttime clouds of Venus are not hardly comprised of crystallized dust storms, thus of whatever amounts of H2O are certainly not exactly free to move about the globe, but as a nearby migration resource of a nearly hydrodynamic matrix in the form of highly acidic solutions, though being nicely suspended aloft by the thermal energy and a truly terrific buoyancy worth of what the lower (crystal clear) atmosphere itself has to offer.
Upper most atmosphere, as that extending from the fringe of space to the zone of 100 km above the surface, varies in temperature from a maximum of 300ºK (80ºF) in the daytime to a minimum of 123ºK (-238ºF) at night, of which this alone clearly stipulates upon the enormous thermal differentials transpiring between day and night. In the mid atmospheric zone, temperatures again increase somewhat linear from 173ºK (-148ºF) of being 100 km above the surface, to roughly 263ºK (14ºF) at the top of a nearly continuous cloud deck that's roughly at 65 km. As to be expected below the cloud tops the temperature continues to increase, though advancing somewhat sharply through the lower atmosphere, or troposphere, eventually reaching a rather toasty maximum of 733ºK (860ºF) at the planet's surface.
It's my understanding that the main cloud deck (including haze factor) may extend from as little as 45 km off the surface, up to nearly 70 km, shifting itself somewhat lower (-10%) within the extended season of nighttime, and in places that lower haze zone might even extend down to as little as 25 km.
The suggested daytime temperature of Venus supposedly ranges from 653ºK (383C or 721F) at the summit of Maxwell Montes to 766ºK (496C or 925F) at the absolute bottom of their Diana Chasma trench (Venus death valley), although others have stipulated that 600°K and even somewhat less is easily within the realm of possibilities. The highest suggested point on Venus is that of Maxwell Montes, at 10.8 km above the mean level, plus I believe there may yet be some mountain peaks near Istar Terra reaching as great as 17 km, and if so that's several miles higher than Mount Everest. There is some evidence that this zone of Maxwell Montes could remain as an active volcano. Among the lowest points recorded are in the rift valley, the Diana Chasma that's 2.9 km below the mean level. This point is about one-fifth the greatest depth on Earth in the Marianas Trench. Magellan imaged upon the longest known channel in the solar system, that channel being 6,800 km long and averaging slightly over 1.8 km wide. There's another somewhat extensively long and wide canyon/rille that's clearly associated with the GUTH Venus community, although at least they've got a suspension bridge to work with.
It's been reported and reasonably estimated that the lower atmosphere of Venus, the portion situated below 20 kilometers, contains about 80% of the atmospheric mass, yet this region has largely been unexplored. That leaves us with 20% for accommdating everything else, of which the entire cloud density factor might have to represent a mere 10% of whatever the grand atmospheric total.
The atmospheric pressure on the surface being 92+bars, is equivalent to an underwater pressure of 900+ meters (3,000 feet) beneath the surface of our ocean. The daytime thermal lapse rate (the rate at which temperature diminishes with altitude) near the surface has been estimated at 7.8 K per kilometer, whereas an ongoing (2900 hours worth) of nighttime seasonal extraction of essentially all the solar influx, plus exporting of whatever planetary geology energy has to contribute, should allow the near surface thermal lapse to reach past 10ºK/km, such as in zones of greater convection, induced along by either the circulating atmosphere itself and/or that of what mountainous terrain contributes.
"Meadows and Crisp have been able to see through the atmosphere to the surface, by looking through "windows" in the atmosphere, in the far wings of the infrared absorption features, specifically near 1.0, 1.1 and 1.18 micron wavelengths. One of the things they are able to do is to constrain the temperature gradient in the lower 6 km of the atmosphere to -7 to -7.4 K/km, as compared to the previously accepted value of -8.5 K/km from Seiff. This means that the lower atmosphere is more stable than was previously thought against local convection in its lowest levels."
"Meanwhile, in another issue, Journal of Geophysical Research (Planets), vol. 101, no. E3, March 25, 1996, we find another interesting paper: "The Stability of Climate on Venus", by Mark A. Bullock and David H. Grinspoon. Here the authors argue that the climate on Venus is in unstable equilibrium, such that a significant influx of radiatively important gases (CO2, H2O, etc.) could cause the climate to migrate to "another climate regime"."
From: Tim Thompson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
"In the atmosphere of Venus, heat is deposited mostly in the upper atmosphere, between about 60 and 100 km up. About 2% of the incident sunlight makes it to the surface,"
Of course that 2% worth of Venus solar photon influx of 2650 w/m2 should accomplish 53 watts/m2 which is a good amount of solar energy, and I believe that illuminating nearly the same as 4% influx achieves upon Earth, however I also believe that our wizard Tim was speaking primarily of the humanly visible spectrum, and not of the portion of near-UV or into the UV/a spectrum, whereas as much as 25% of the 400~425 nm might be realized, though at least 10% could still be considered the visual average, that is if we're talking about those relatively cool nighttime clouds, whereas thinner zones of perhaps offering as little as 5% depth or possibly even less of the average cloud density do exist as providing greater opacity windows, thereby capable of allowing greater amounts of near UV and whatever UV/a star light and even the likes of a somewhat bluish earthshine as to deliver a sufficient number of those as surface illuminating photons, especially illuminating if you were a nocturnal sort of individual having the biological advantage of vastly superior nightvision, and/or by a technology method of utilizing a reasonably good sort of collector and somewhat CCD or just collector cells of plain old vacuum tube photon detectors, of which such vacuum tube technology would in fact operate fine and dandy upon Venus.
Situated well above the bulk of cloud density, where the pressure is approximately 0.25 bar, and the temperature clearly becomes sub-freezing 190ºK (-83ºC), whereas at such high altitudes the solar influx offers an absolute great deal of near-UV and UV/a which most likely tries it's best at dissociating the sulphuric acid (H2SO4) into the likes of O2, and/or water (H2O) and plain old sulphur dioxide (SO2), and where it's been said to re-formulate into carbon dioxide that which forms the uniform fog or mist that surrounds the clouds. Of course at 190ºK and even the 0.25 Bar environment, such a nasty matrix as a highly sulphuric acid mist or fog that's traveling along at somewhat great speeds, and otherwise simply isn't going to distill out so easily on it's own accord, especially with there be such a thermally conductive amount of turbulence and good density of what's extending a few kilometer below the main body of clouds, as for representing the top of a fairly terrific heat-exchanging (thermally conductive as well as electrolytic) layer, offering perhaps at least an easily accessable 5 km worth of suspended H2SO4. In other words, what goes around really comes around in fast cycles when it's having anything to do with those upper Venus clouds.
Airship wise, clearly the upper most 5 km worth of clouds and zone of haze needs to be avoided, and/or of least time of exposure if the rigid airship is having to penetrate such, as otherwise the notion of cruising about Venus needs to be situated well below this cloud bank, whereas up to 35 km is perhaps where the clear and calm CO2 ocean is that's worth navigating through, and even of that elevation may in spots become limited to as little as 25 km while cruising their nighttime season, although there's no specific reason for any rigid airship to travel at much greater than 10 km, as this is where the buoyancy is so much greater and the outside temperature is only somewhat hot, but not insurmountably hot. Robotic airships as utilized for easy and efficient distillation extracting of H2O from the body of them clouds is another topic of how to go about surviving in spite of whatever the mainstream status quo of Earth has to say (though what Venus heathen in his right mind would pay any attention to what Earth has to say), even though the basalt and silica composites of construction are impervious to any acidic corrosion, as it's the potential of turbulence factors that needs to be dealt with.
Just for another pesky point of my ever improving village idiot perspectives;
Liquid water (as in pure H2O) should become stable on the Venus surface at temperatures of around 580ºK or below, though that's still a wee bit far from the current estimates of 620ºK to 720ºK or greater surface temperatures. Although, the likes of H2O2 and/or even that H2O portion as contained within a sulphuric solution of formulation should become perfectly good for go, without further pressurization (such as easily provided by most any spherical storage reservoir tank). Extracting H2O by way of vacuum distillation, as could be easily accomplished via rigid airship, is of course another entirely off-limits notion for the likes of our NASA, as that would imply some form of intelligent life, of which it's perfectly clear that we Earth humans can't seem to possibly figure out how the hell one could manage surviving within such a truly tough as hell greenhouse situation, then we'll certainly be damned if we'll ever consider such notions on behalf of accommodating another race and/or species that's smarter than us. After all, at this point we'd just as soon nuke our own stealth WMD donkey-carts before asking a few questions as to why folks hate our bloody guts so much.
Calling Venus is way less than moon-dirt cheap, as for being a local laser area code: (if we're not being allowed to officially look at Venus, much less even discuss the possibilities, then it certainly can't hurt our focusing a few laser cannons upon it);
If you're perchance the sort of smart all-knowing individual that's more interested in the truly viable prospects of our achieving interplanetary communications (contacting ETs without the obviously disability of having to utilize radio), as for that relatively simple and extremely efficient quest as compared to sending another physical probe, I've added lots of notions, if not a little too much quantum packet information into this following page;
Here's some of the latest deliveries and additions to what other has become new and improved, and of what's certainly still perfectly hot as well as cold and nasty about our moon, Venus and Sirius, as offering a bit more than you may need to know of what my three brain cells can deliver on behalf of those Sirius/c lizard folk terraforming the likes of Mars, Earth and perhaps having something to do with our first moon becoming Venus. Basically, I thinking those Dogon folks did in fact meet with and were educated by the visitors they spoke of that originated from Sirius, and perhaps that's why I'm still the chief village idiot and you're not. Then we have the little Dropas and their Stone Discs (there's certainly lots more besides these three related links that'll offer the same story)