Not terraformable?

[Tyres O'Flaherty]

I'll admit to not being an expert of any kind so I'm curious as to why this ELW doesn't appear to be terraformable:

Is it the "far from chemical equilibrium" per the description?

Thanks.

 

[goemon]

no ELW is terraformable.
they are either terraformed, or natural earth-like-worlds. there is nothing to do to them aka terraform. you wouldn't terraform terra, would you?

 

[Tyres O'Flaherty]

Gotcha, Ta.

 

[Sapyx]

As stated above, Earth-like worlds do not need terraforming, so they are therefore not classified as candidates for terraforming. There was one terraformable ELW listed in EDSM; turned out it was a manually edited typo (or a CMDR trying to pad their ELW count), and not an ELW after all.

This doesn't stop some people from terraforming Earthlike worlds anyway. Yeah, I'm looking at you, Sirius Corporation. Sothis A5 and A6 were both already Earth-like worlds when you found them and colonized them. Yet Newholm Station is, and always had been ever since it arrived in Sothis deep orbit, a "Terraforming" economy. Whatsa matta, 318 K too hot for you?

 

[Tyres O'Flaherty]

I understand...

However...

"Terraforming" is transforming a body so its atmosphere, ecology etc. become suitable for earthlings. But what if the world is earth like but still needs work to, say, make the air breathable; is that not terraforming?

In the example above, the description says a state of non-equilibrium of chemical balance exists (although I've no idea what that means) so does terraforming not make this umm... become equal?

Or am I just barking up the semantic tree?

 

[Factabulous]

Or am I just barking up the semantic tree?

yes. Earth. Like. World. Clue in the name

 

[Ian Doncaster]

In the example above, the description says a state of non-equilibrium of chemical balance exists (although I've no idea what that means) so does terraforming not make this umm... become equal?

No, definitely not.

If you want to end the non-equilibrium of chemical balance you need to hit it with high-energy weapons, a really big rock, something like that - wipe out all life - then wait a few millenia for the dust to settle. Basically you "shouldn't" have free oxygen in an atmosphere in any non-trace quantity, because it reacts with almost anything. So if you have free oxygen, something is pushing the atmosphere out of a purely chemical equilibrium - loosely speaking, a plant, whether natural or industrial - to continually create that oxygen. Equilibrium is stasis. Life is change.

ELWs in Elite Dangerous are ones with an atmospheric composition, temperature and pressure that's survivable without further assistance by human life - this may be a natural occurrence, or terraforming may have been used to adjust a planet which was further from that state towards it: either way it requires something to be continually generating the oxygen and putting the atmosphere out of chemical equilibrium.

I would say that "Water Worlds" are semi-Earthlike: they've got broadly the same water-based life, but the atmospheric composition would kill an unshielded human relatively quickly (might be weeks rather than minutes, for some of them) ... while Terraformable High Metal Content worlds are in the right temperature range (or would be, with a human-breathable atmosphere) but don't have any significant life to adjust atmospheric composition.

(The trace lifeforms like Bark Mounds - and the equivalents found on the tenuous atmospheres in Odyssey - probably aren't putting the atmosphere out of chemical equilibrium due to their sparse distribution ... and the lack of an atmosphere ... but they may be doing something similar to the ground they rest on)

 

[varonica]

"Terraforming" is transforming a body so its atmosphere, ecology etc. become suitable for earthlings. But what if the world is earth like but still needs work to, say, make the air breathable; is that not terraforming?

Then it would't be classified as an ELW, it would be a terraformable world, by definition an ELW is human survivable with no artificial aids.

 

[Sapyx]

A "Pandora-from-Avatar-like world" with plants, trees, oceans etc but with an atmosphere unbreathable by humans - too hot, too cold, too much CO2, not enough oxygen - would be classed as a "water world" under ED's definition set.

Here we have a difference between real-world-scientists and ED in their definition of "Earth-like". Under the ED definition, the planet's atmosphere must already be breathable before it can earn the ELW title. 21st century exoplanetologists call anything with solid ground and within an order of magnitude of Earth's mass an "Earth-like world".

 

[Sapyx]

In the example above, the description says a state of non-equilibrium of chemical balance exists (although I've no idea what that means) so does terraforming not make this umm... become equal?

The disequilibrium mentioned in the planet description refers to the instability of the atmosphere, hydrosphere and lithosphere caused by the presence of life on the surface. It is life itself that causes such chemical imbalances. Specifically, a planet as hot as Earth cannot have that much oxygen in it's atmosphere, unless there's something non-geological - life - creating it. Kill off all Earth-life, and the oxygen rapidly disappears.

Exoplanetologists look for such chemical imbalances as key indicators of the possible presence of life. People have in the past argued for the presence of life on Mars, Titan and Venus, based on similar observations of chemical disequilibrium (such as the recent discovery of phosphine on Venus). Venus, in chemical equilibrium, cannot have that much phosphine in its atmosphere (or so it is argued), therefore some non-geological process - life - must be creating it.

The chemical disequilibrium of Venus is tiny, compared to the disequilibrium of Earth. A dispassionate remote observer of Earth would say that it "should" have a Venusian-style CO2-rich, oxygen-free atmosphere, if it were not for all those lifeforms on it pushing it away from that equilibrium.

 

[Zieman]

A "Pandora-from-Avatar-like world" with plants, trees, oceans etc but with an atmosphere unbreathable by humans - too hot, too cold, too much CO2, not enough oxygen - would be classed as a "water world" under ED's definition set.

Too bad there's an inconsistency in E: D's set - those Water Worlds never have any substantial land masses, so the Pandora would be HMC CFT.

 

[Sapyx]

Too bad there's an inconsistency in E: D's set - those Water Worlds never have any substantial land masses, so the Pandora would be HMC CFT.

This is due to a disagreement between ED's Science department, who invented the definition, and the Art department, who created the look, and who responded to player complaints that "ELWs and WWs looked too much alike" and "shouldn't a water world be covered in water". Because as you may recall, Water Worlds used to look exactly like Earth-likes in terms of landmasses, only the water worlds were less green.

 

[Zieman]

Water Worlds used to look exactly like Earth-likes in terms of landmasses, only the water worlds were less green

I was beginning to think that my memories of such WWs were just figments of imagination. Thanks for confirming that they were real!
I do miss those WWs, they should be around. Now there's huge gap between less than 50% covered by water (presumably water, at least on the terraformable HMCs) and fully covered in water, where only ELWs reside. There should be vast variation of land mass inside WW classification.

HMCs do occupy the <50% of surface water slot, WWs shoud occupy the whole range of 50-100% water, regardless of terraformability (like HMCs do on their half), and ELWs remain a special case outside of that divide.