None that I know of. As far as biology is concerned, world builders only seem to care about designing new species and ecosystems, such as Chris Wayan's cringeworthy alien races.
Well that's another thing I have yet to flesh out. So far the only thing that's definite is that only humans and rats are present from Earth's ecosystem.
And yes I'll have worlds with local civilisations too. Humans are in because I'm lazy and I rationalised it with a pretty meta explanation that however isn't supposed to be revealed.
Speaking of worldbuilding…
I've been toying with the idea of devising climate and biome maps for a hypothetical terraformed Moon. So far I've just played around with Google Earth/relief maps and read about some of the complications.
Rotation period may be the first to come to mind. While conventional wisdom holds that very long day and night periods would be hazardous to life, some studies argue that even a Venerean day-night cycle could hold life, as it'd allow thicker cloud formations. If Venus' month-long days can be handled, then the Moon is even easier. Rotation can be sped up low-angle impacts, but am I correct to assume that specifically hitting the Moon with asteroids at high speed and right angle would be riskier than other forms of asteroid bombardment?
I've also thought about the effects of low gravity; it'd probably make the highlands (there's about 9km of difference between the highest peaks and the sea level I've chosen in the first picture) easier to breathe in and settle, but could be a hazard for humans in the long run. Since days would be long, a thick atmosphere would be useful to minimize extreme temperature differences between day and night hemispheres, and this is also helpful for the highlands. The resulting greater heat would also aid polar settlement; ultimately, everyone but equatorial settlers would benefit.
Hydrography would also be made complicated by the swiss cheese relief. Hundreds of crater lakes would dot the continents, though on drier lands they'd be tiny or even empty. Korolev would be an interesting case: snowmelt from the Hymalayan heights (which could very well be the starting point for a space elevator) would feed a sizable inner sea around which many settlers enjoy the mild equatorial highland weather. The rest of the dark side wouldn't be so lucky, though; continentality and extreme topography could very well create deserts through much of its territory.
Hey, I actually have a pretty interesting space-race in here. They're based on radial symmetry, with six limbs and six fingers on each limb, each limb originally having its own mouth connection to the central chamber. Then I produce something vaguely humanoid from it, by adding bilateral symmetry running through limbs, so that front limb becomes a head, back limb becomes a tail, and side limbs become legs in first phase; with adaptation to terrestrial environment the mouths belonging to side limbs disconnect and form four lung lobes, which function a bit like the two-stroke engine in that there's a muscular diaphragm between two lobes on each side so that when one of the lobes is inhaling, the other one is exhaling. Oh and reproduction organs are mounted centrally. I am much more satisfied with this setup than the silly concept of lung opening into the throat (great recipe for choking yourself) and having genitals mounted right next to waste excretion (great recipe for sick fetishes including gomosex prostate abuse).>>3657
Use orbital shades and mirrors instead of rotating the Moon faster. Outer side needs to be opaque, inner side needs to be reflective. That way, you're reflecting sunlight onto the nightside, and eclipsing the Sun on the dayside.
I've been thinking the same a couple years ago myself regarding hydrography. What's an additional problem is that there would probably be mad erosion (on surface and underground) going on at the start, as rocks may not pack as compactly everywhere as what happens on Earth (where water flowing downwards into the ground fills the gaps with precipitate, which is how geologic veins are mostly formed).
One thing to note; the lunar maria actually have similar rock composition to oceanic crust, while the cratered parts are closer to continental crust.
Also, on Moon, I'd use a railgun to shoot things into orbit.
>>3672>Hey, I actually have a pretty interesting space-race in here.
But it's still a water- and carbon-based species living in the 0-30 C range?
>Use orbital shades and mirrors instead of rotating the Moon faster. Outer side needs to be opaque, inner side needs to be reflective. That way, you're reflecting sunlight onto the nightside, and eclipsing the Sun on the dayside.
Asteroid bombardments will happen in one way or another and don't leave extensive orbital infrastructure that requires maintenance; they are, however, riskier, but as I've said, asteroid bombardment is pretty much an unavoidable requirement, so one may as well kill two rabbits with one stone.
So there are three possibilities in my mind:
>Only slightly changing the day/night cycle, adding a thicker atmosphere and hoping it works. Only two Hadley cells per hemisphere, as in Chris Wayan's Venus, but the horse latitudes are where they'd be expected to be as there's no equatorial sunshade ring.>Orbital shades>Earthlike rotation period achieved through orbital bombardment. Three Hadley cells per hemisphere.
>What's an additional problem is that there would probably be mad erosion
Erosion wouldn't be that much of a problem because the entire process would be carefully planned and executed over the course of centuries. For many years, the only moon bases will be pressurized, sheltered and only built in the safest places. If it remains unstable after it's already green and breathable, then there's a tough problem.
>Also, on Moon, I'd use a railgun to shoot things into orbit.
Directly shooting cargo, as in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress which I haven't read but should -/liberty/ even had a thread about it a while ago-
is an option I've considered, but I might aswell have both.
Contrary to popular sci-fi opinion, nothing other than carbon and water can lead to chemistry that can support polymers suitable for life. Maybe substituting water for formaldehyde would work; and well boron is just as versatile as carbon is, but water is one of the most common molecules in space and boron is super rare compared to carbon.
Ammonia is benis again firstly because water is an order of magnitude more abundant, and secondly because in ammonia you cannot do acid-base reactions because everything is an acid in ammonia. But it's better as a ligand for metals, I can give it that.
Oh erosion of course wouldn't be a problem after it's done, but I'm pointing at that you can't really know how shit is going to drain in the end product.
iirc there was greyscale raw data available somewhere
Dude get you're self that 8GB tiff. It's a 16bit, map has resolution of 118m and vertical resolution of 0.5m
and yes you barely get any land, it's just a super deep basin.
I'll try to get it now that I've moved to a more powerful battle station with a better internet connection this weekend.
There's one more thing I've noticed about low gravity: the smoother pressure gradient from sea level to the mountains also means higher elevations don't cool out as much. This not only makes them easier to live in, but also diminishes the impact of their rain shadows. The wide continent with Hymalayan heights on the far side won't be as arid as I had thought.
I've downloaded the 8gb file, but neither GIMP nor Irfanview can open it.
I'll ask around for help on Reddit.
Oh cool. I would love something like this but in vector graphics. GPlates probably comes the closest, but is clearly not intended for such usage. I'd be most glad if I could just plug it into inkscape as I'm used to working with it already.
I presume for projections which need a focus point (or arc) you can specify it yourself? I would need something that would allow me to work out details around specific points on a globe, and be able to project it onto global map or around a different point.
>>3719>I presume for projections which need a focus point (or arc) you can specify it yourself?
Indeed, you can specify the central longitude or, in the case of conic projections, the focus point.
Ok a tip. Datum on Mars is ''way'' too high. When I experimented this shit I think I went even more than 1km below for reasonable topography. Because now, you already have seas over most the interesting floodplains.
For Moon I'd say around datum is where you get the most interesting coastlines. Perhaps just high enough to get a strait between both basins is good. Steepness is not a problem because gravity.
Do you have a working copy of the LOLA grayscale map, by any chance?
Next weekend I'll renew my search for a grayscale height map; so far I can only get inaccurate coastlines.
But apparently someone has already gone through a very similar problem (http://forum.imagej.net/t/split-colored-height-map-of-moon-in-greyscale-images/3597/5
); I'll get ImageJ and figure out if the 5mb map can still be used.
No. But I can try and see if I can do some magic to turn it usable.
Oh. I can tell you what's wrong.
You probably have the latest ''stable'' GIMP installed, which is the 2.8.16. You need 2.9.2 or higher to process higher bit depths.
fuck it I always forget the formatting for italics round here
>>3729>>3730>You probably have the latest ''stable'' GIMP installed, which is the 2.8.16. You need 2.9.2 or higher to process higher bit depths.
I see, I'll check my version next weekend.
Currently I'm running the ImageJ script I've found (https://gist.github.com/lacan/db89358ca5ba5d4308a52fc37cd05550
), at row 430 or 5389. If this goes right, I'll have a better map to work with this week.
joj is this 1bit
I've also saved the 16 bit version, but GIMP and Windows Explorer only show it as a completely black picture with no information (despite the 3mb filesize as a .png or nearly 28mb as a .tif).
I've obtained a 32bit version of GIMP 2.9.3 and it seems it may be able to open the LOLA heightmap… after hours of loading. I'll post a downsized version if it does successfully finish opening.
Backup plan is to overlay the black and white map converted with the script over the original, as it already has a reasonable sea level, and work on from there.
I-it will be on archive.org, r-right?
why u fuckin do this, the fuckin compression artifacts
See for yourself:http://l2db.selene.darts.isas.jaxa.jp/> The SELENE Data Archive will be closed at noon on September 29th, 2017. Kaguya data will continuously be provided on the SELENE Planetary Data System (PDS) site 1 and the KADIAS (KAguya Data Integrated Analysis System)2.>We hope that Kaguya data contributes to your research and activities ongoingly.>>3792>why u fuckin do this, the fuckin compression artifacts
In the next days I'll try opening the 8gb raw data, but it seems it's just too big for my toaster to handle.
The red map I've posted seems good enough: after turning it into grayscale and selecting a sea level I liked, I've overlaid it in the higher quality LOLA map >>3691
and the end result has some minor imperfections, but it's still workable.
Last time I tried to open the raw data, the loading bar took a long time to fill completely, but even after several hours, it still wouldn't finish and gimp.exe would stabilize at a certain point of memory usage. But I'll try again.
I'm thinking about atmospheric circulation, climate zones and the rotation period. Earthlike rotation with three circulation cells per hemisphere is the easiest for my first attempt at worldbuilding because I can directly compare climate zones to Earth's and read on good sources in the net.
But a day/night cycle provided by a system of orbital mirrors, with only two cells, besides likely having a safer orbital bombardment phase, offers the advantage of pushing the northern hemisphere's dry latitudes away from the great Appenine-Jura peninsula. Keep in mind that my choice of sea level was in large part determined by this corner of the Moon: I conceive it as breadbasket feeding the Earth, and thus, I want as much warm and lush flat land as possible. With the rest of Luna too cratered, the only solution is to leave some of the maria exposed.
A two-cell system with a low pressure zone at the Equator doesn't make sense, though.
Because of low on poles?
It's not directly impossible because of that. I have seen situations when a temporary low has established over north pole (effectively adding a fourth cell in the northern hemisphere), though that's a rare development. But it would be a passive cell. Like the Ferrel cell on Earth; driven not by convective processes but simply by being bound to the Hadley cell as a heat sink.
I don't see a reason why Ferrel cell couldn't reach all the way up to the pole. Now a consequence of that would be that instead of Rossby waves driving fronts and generating cold core lows along the Ferrel/Polar boundary, there would simply be a stationary cold-core low on the pole.
But I may be missing something as finding a physical model that describes development of planetary atmospheric cells is something I still need to do.
I'll consider climates based on a two-cell system, then.
So far I've already scribbled some climates in a three-cell system. I've identified 3 likely desert locations: the Jura and Appenine rainshadows and a region east of Mare Nubium it may not necessarily reach the sea because there are so many craters lying around, and craters are relevant because moisture still gets through their walls, particularly given that rainshadows are weaker here. But on the other hand, a dry west coast may also prevent crater lakes from accumulating much water, so there are two conflicting factors at work.
I found something on atmospheric circulation cell modelling. Need to study it a bit more in depth.http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/804/1/60
However this model only operates with Earth's dimensions, while varying rotation rate, irradiance, atmospheric pressure, and mass. One would need to do the same while varying radius too.
okay read through; it does touch planetary radius dependence but varying that also varies all other parameters to keep consistence with physics, and there's no visualisation of results.
Planets with faster rotation rates are characterized by smaller and weaker Hadley cells and smaller eddy length scales. This results in a larger equator-to-pole temperature difference and weaker jets. The number of jets grows with rotation rate. Slowly rotating planets will have an equatorial eddy momentum flux convergence, resulting in superrotation (e.g., Venus, Titan).
The stellar flux has a nonmonotonic response in most aspects we have examined, due to the strong nonlinear dependence of water vapor abundance on temperature. Warmer and closer planets will have smaller equator-to-pole temperature differences due to enhanced eddy MSE transport due to the latent heat component, which increases significantly with temperature. However, planets that are far enough from their parent star, so that for their abundance of water vapor the atmospheres are dry, will also have smaller equator-to-pole temperature differences due to the overall lower temperatures and larger radiative timescales. Hadley and Ferrel cells exhibit the same nonmonotonic behavior.
Planets with larger atmospheric masses generally have larger horizontal fluxes but lower vertical fluxes, resulting in reduced equator-to-pole temperature differences and higher surface temperatures. Hadley and Ferrel cells increase in strength with atmospheric mass due to the increased mass transport.
Planets with larger mean densities and therefore larger surface gravity have stronger Hadley and Ferrel cells. For these cases, despite the growth of eddy energy with surface gravity, the main controller of the extratropical temperature is the strengthening of the Ferrel cells, and therefore the equator-to-pole temperature difference increases with mean planetary density.
Planets with larger optical thickness are warmer across all latitudes, and the equator-to-pole temperature difference decreases with the increase of optical thickness due to enhanced poleward eddy MSE transport (mainly because of increased latent heat transport) in the warmer climates.
Planets with larger radii and consequently larger gravity show a decrease in equator-to-pole temperature gradient with increasing radius due to enhanced poleward eddy MSE transport. However, despite the reduction in temperature gradients, this effect does not compensate for the increase in distance between the equator and the pole, and therefore overall the equator-to-pole temperature difference increases.
The dependence of the equator-to-pole temperature difference on rotation rate, atmospheric mass, and other parameters implies that dynamics may exert a significant effect on global-mean climate feedbacks such as the conditions under which a planet transitions into a globally frozen, "Snowball Earth" state. Thus, our results imply that the dynamics influences planetary habitability, including the width of the classical habitable zone.
Thanks, that clears some things up.
>At slow rotation rates, the Hadley cells are nearly global, the subtropical jets reside at high latitude, and the equator-pole temperature difference is small
A one-cell system seems the most realistic. I had assumed that a slowly rotating Moon would have two cells per hemisphere like Chris Wayan's Venus and each cell would necessarily have 45 degrees of latitude, but his circulation is not a good example because of its equatorial shades and cell width is variable.
A single cell system may not necessarily reach the poles, though; it can have polar collars like Venus. But for this model I'm supposing they do reach the highest latitudes.
What I'm wondering about a single cell model is the width of the rainforest and desert bands. Would their relative size within the cell remain, leading to dry areas from the pole to 60 degrees aswell as wide bands of lush equatorial vegetation, or would they have about as much width as our bands of high/low pressure, leading to a very gradual transition to savanna and steppe? Either way, I don't get to waste the exposed maria on deserts.
Pic related is some of what I had already scribbled on climate.>>3679> and secondly because in ammonia you cannot do acid-base reactions because everything is an acid in ammonia.
Well, it's not that simple. NH4 and NH2 can act as equivalents to hydronium and hydroxide, with their concentrations changed by the dissolution of metal amides and ammonium salts. See https://www.jstor.org/stable/3624179?&seq=2#page_scan_tab_contents
And turns out there's more literature on this subject.
Hm. Actually this is bad. Very bad, and I didn't think about it because I rarely considered unusual rotation cases.
From what I understand about formation of rainforest bands, it depends a lot on how far the ITCZ moves away from the equator seasonally. This depends on axial tilt. Areas that are too far away from the equator to be reached by a rain season will be desert, all the way to where the Hadley cell ends – because within Hadley cell, the winds are mostly equatorwards, bringing in colder, dryer air. It is only within the Ferrel cell where desert band ends, and even there it depends a lot on orography because Ferrel cell is a passive eddy.
The Moon has axial tilt of 1.5424° to ecliptic, and 6.687° to orbit plane which itself is 5.145° off the ecliptic. This is much less than on Earth, so the ITCZ will barely move off the equator. So the result is: arid climate almost from the pole (or whereever the Hadley cell terminates) all the way down to 5° within the equator.
The issue with NH₃ is that it's notoriously hard to deprotonate. Hence I said, everything is an acid in ammonia. NH₂⁻ is attainable but one needs much stronger bases to get there. Only carbon and boron are atoms that bind hydrogen stronger, but CH₄ and BH₃ don't have free electron pairs and thus can't deprotonate NH₃ either. Alkali metals do form amides, but the reaction is notoriously slow – so slow, actually, that alkali metals can be regenerated after being dissolved in NH₃ after days, because the reaction stays in the intermediate stage where A⁺ have already shed their electrons, but NH₃ molecules refuse to accept them to release hydrogen like water does, leading to a weird solution of free electrons, which can even act as a metal at high enough concentrations of dissloved metal. Given enough time, however, the reaction does occur, giving amides equivalent to hydroxides which are produced practically instantly.https://www.chemistryworld.com/podcasts/solvated-electrons/2500348.article
At the same time, the self-dissociation product of ammonia is 10⁻³⁰, compared to water's 10⁻¹⁴. There's barely any NH₄⁺ and NH₂⁻ present in liquid ammonia, compared to a decent amount in water.
I didn't notice that, as I had mostly disregarded seasonal effects when reading on climate. A solution is to discard the orbital mirror system, increase the atmosphere even more and thus have the long day/night cycle as a fundamental point in hydrology.
Either that, or the risky low-angle bombardment.
>Our main conclusion is that for all stellar types slowly rotating planets (orbital period ≈ 100 days or more) behave similarly to tidally locked planets and have a high planetary albedo near the inner edge of the habitable zone>(orbital period ≈ 100 days or more)
The Moon's rotation period is closer to the first case than the second. Even if I maximize the greenhouse effect in a desperate attempt to get more moisture, there'll probably still be dry latitudes and I wouldn't want any of them getting sunlight for two weeks.
So there must be another solution.>>3823
One funny thing I found is that a lot of people argue on the internet that permanent equatorial conditions would inhibit intensive human settlement and agriculture. I'd say that's bullshit because Indonesia is densely populated and the Amazon is being deforested for commercial agriculture as we speak.
>>3826>One funny thing I found is that a lot of people argue on the internet that permanent equatorial conditions would inhibit intensive human settlement and agriculture. I'd say that's bullshit because Indonesia is densely populated and the Amazon is being deforested for commercial agriculture as we speak.
It's how they rationalise niggers nigging.
Equatorial rainforests do have a number of disadvantages for civilization, which you can notice if you spend at least a week in one. Besides diseases and opressive weather, the abundance of food means that organized civilization is unlikely to rise locally, unlike the Fertile Crescent or the temperate regions where a level of planning and forward thinking is obligatory.
But none of this stops a civilization with sufficient technology to defeat disease and poor soils if it's determined to settle.
You can give Mercury a nice tilt of 30-40° to make the rain season reach much further north/south. Since one year is only 88 days, there will not be much of a long dry season fucking shit up.
I'm already sketching what atmospheric circulation could be like with 30° tilt. Theoretically, on every solstice one polar cell is squeezed into almost nothing while another one expands all the way to 30°; this means that both the Equator and the Tropics have two rainy seasons and two dry ones, so equatorial latitudes wouldn't be as drenched as ours.
But the actual circulation would be different as the ITCZ does not correspond exactly to the subsolar latitude.
Sea level at 145 is 5584,76m above the bottom of Rachmaninoff crater, or some 200m above average elevation. This leaves 4275m from sea level to the highest peaks. Mercury will probably only have a few permanently frozen mountaintops.
Ignore the grid since I got it wrong on first attempt, and some topographic details have been slightly changed too, but in general the circulation shouldn't be changed
(explanation: I was drawing atop the first definite sketch of continent shapes I had)
Wtf you can't import Mercator projection?
Oh damn I'll need to switch. I like Mercator because it's easy to get shapes right there…
Even more so, the disgusting Gall–Peters is supported.
an article on theoretical biology that's freshly outhttps://doi.org/10.1017/S1473550417000362sci-hub it
A few days ago I've realized that even if the polar front moves as far south as I want it to, that wouldn't make much of a difference (except for islands) as the continents would still have higher pressure. So the subtropics would have their wet season only in their solstices.
So east coasts may be forested (though reaching less and less of the continental interior with every degree) up to 30°, but west coasts will thin out until they're savannas and the like. True deserts should exist in some of the rainshadowed areas deep inland, particularly that one in the main continent boxed on all sides by the heights.
something I'd like to have for terrain buildinghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5w685udM838
I wonder how well this would work for continent-sized terrain creation.
If I had to, I'd use it in a fractal manner, so I'd draw the top layer first, then go down and do smaller (partially overlapping) sections, then go from bottom up again and match them up in a manner that fits.
Would take a long time but I think it should be doable.
Spherical coordinates would be the biggest problem, I think. Cartesian distance is way too deeply ingrained in almost any software of this kind, so even tuning it and feeding it a map projection wouldn't work.