Criteria for terraforming candidate are strange / non-logical

[Neutronium]

Severity
Minor

Frequency
Once (<1%)

Time of occurrence
~ 21:00 GMT

Date of occurrence
22/01/18

VR?
None / N/A

Location
Col 89 Sector LI-J d9-3

Ship/SRV?
Ship

Ship Type
ASP EXPLORER

Commander Name
NEUTRONIUM

Description
While exploring I just came across this system where planet(s) with much harsher atmospheric and climatic conditions are designated as candidates for terraforming whereas planet with more earth-like less harsh conditions is not.

Steps to Reproduce
Visit Col 89 Sector LI-J d9-3

Additional files?

 

[Nene]

It's too far out from the star - if you took the CO2 down to a reasonable level, the temperature would plummet to the point where it's not viable for habitation. It's outside the goldilocks zone. Not that even with that much CO2 it's managed to get higher than -50ºC average surface temperature.

 

[QA-Mitch]

Hey neutronium,

Thanks for the feedback.

I'll pass this on for review.

 

[varonica]

Severity
Minor

Frequency
Once (<1%)

Time of occurrence
~ 21:00 GMT

Date of occurrence
22/01/18

VR?
None / N/A

Location
Col 89 Sector LI-J d9-3

Ship/SRV?
Ship

Ship Type
ASP EXPLORER

Commander Name
NEUTRONIUM

Description
While exploring I just came across this system where planet(s) with much harsher atmospheric and climatic conditions are designated as candidates for terraforming whereas planet with more earth-like conditions is not.

Steps to Reproduce
Visit Col 89 Sector LI-J d9-3

Additional files?
http://i.imgur.com/KH4dIwW.png
http://i.imgur.com/zwTZsTR.png

As mentioned already, if the planet is outside the goldilocks zone where water would be liquid with atmospheric conditions the same as our earth then it won't be terraformable no matter what the current conditions. Likewise it doesn't matter what the current conditions of a body areif it's in the goldilocks zone, that's the entire point of terraforming, to change the current conditions to ones more amenable to human life and settlement.

You can work out the goldilocks zone yourself, there are some guides around that will help, or you can use EDDiscovery which will tell you what extent of the goldilocks zone is in LS.

So to sum up, current condition are irrelevant to terraforming, the distance from the star is the most important, followed by size, gravity etc. The terraforming candidate is probably the right distance for a habitable planet, it's just got a very high greenhouse factor, the non-terraforming candidate is three times as far from the star, much further out from the star than earth, if it's a smaller star putting out less heat then the closer planet at just over 400ls is probably smack in the middle of the goldilocks zone.

 

[Neutronium]

Hm OK. However the inner one will require a hell of a terraforming effort (in terms of energy & cost) to get it to a habbitable level. The outer one is already habbitable even without space suits. The atmosphere is breathable with a small CO2 filter in the breathing mask. You would only need very warm clothes to survive. Also if you could slow down its rotaion it would get more heat from its star but that is probably very costly.

 

[varonica]

Hm OK. However the inner one will require a hell of a terraforming effort (in terms of energy & cost) to get it to a habbitable level.

So it is terrformable, feature working as expected, there's no requirement to specify how much work it will take, and it may not take much work, just time for seeded biology to do its job.

The outer one is already habbitable even without space suits. The atmosphere is breathable with a small CO2 filter in the breathing mask. You would only need very warm clothes to survive. Also if you could slow down its rotaion it would get more heat from its star but that is probably very costly.

It's already been stated that if the CO2 was reduced to satisfactory level the temperature would drop drastically to a point where it probably wouldn't be habitable. If it's outside the goldilocks zone an earth like atmosphere won't maintain the heat enough to prevent water freezing on the entire planet. certainly you can survive on a body with frozen water using technology to melt water, but the criteria for earth like is basically human habitable without shiploads of technology to keep you alive. If I drop you on a planet with nothing but clothes and food for a month at the end of the month you should still be alive without the need for any sort of technology. On a planet where the entire water load is frozen solid this not going to happen. Now we can go on about Eskimo's living in the frozen north for years, but we have to understand that what kept Eskimos alive is a life cycle that allowed aquatic animals to survive so they could be hunted and used for food, clothes, heating and other things, a life support system powered by warmer climates! on a completely frozen world this wouldn't happen.

So to conclude an earth like world requires that if you lose all your technology you would survive comfortably, the outer planet doesn't provide that possibility while the inner one does, at a cost sure, but that's why it's terraformable and the other isn't.

 

[varonica]

Just thought I should come back and add this because it seems the basis of the problem

There is no "logic" involved here since logic is a method for evaluating and thinking about "ideas."

Whether a world is terraformable or not isn't a logical question, it's a question based on physics, whether a world would be habitable based on its distance from a star. Now you are free to put up calculations or evidence to show that FD has got it wrong, but arguing on the basis that you simply don't think it's correct isn't going to change anything. Whether a world is terraformable or not isn't an idea it's a conclusion drawn by examining the data, and if FD's algorithms for determining which worlds are terraformable and which aren't have been fed the correct data then we will get the correct answer.

 

[CMDR Runcible Shaw]

Hm OK. However the inner one will require a hell of a terraforming effort (in terms of energy & cost) to get it to a habbitable level. The outer one is already habbitable even without space suits. The atmosphere is breathable with a small CO2 filter in the breathing mask. You would only need very warm clothes to survive. Also if you could slow down its rotaion it would get more heat from its star but that is probably very costly.

Slowing down the rotation wouldn't give the planet more heat. The surface area being heated by the star would be exactly the same.

 

[varonica]

Slowing down the rotation wouldn't give the planet more heat. The surface area being heated by the star would be exactly the same.

It certainly wouldn't change the overall temperature and heat absorption, but it would change the heat differential between the day and night side, causing extreme wind events between night and day, making the planet even less habitable.