Mercury VS Mars
May 20, 2013 1:24 PM   Subscribe

Colonization of Mercury appears a practical possibility, whereas colonization of Mars is really more in the realm of fantasy. I am curious why this doesn't make it to mainstream discussion. Due primarily to its distance from the Sun, the surface of Mercury can reach 700 K (427 °C, 800 °F), however, temperatures at the polar regions are much colder and there may even be deposits of ice inside permanently shaded craters. The polar areas do not experience the extreme daily variation in temperature seen on more equatorial areas of Mercury's surface.

Mercury is also theorized to have a crust rich in iron and magnesium silicates, with the highest concentrations of many valuable minerals of any surface in the solar system, in highly concentrated ores.

Mercury is one of the few terrestrial worlds boasting a magnetic field, along with Earth and Jupiter's moon Ganymede.

Another advantage point is that Mercury's gravity is about 38% when compared to Earth's. Although

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_Mercury
http://spacecolonization.wikia.com/wiki/Colonization_of_Mercury
http://spaceopedia.com/2012/09/the-colonization-of-mercury-how-we-could-colonize-mercury/
posted by flyblackbox (1 comment total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: Hey, Mercury colony might be a neat thing to post about but you've got a bunch of non-linked URLs here and this reads kind of like a personal blog post. If you want to reach us at the contact form to talk a little about how to put together a post for the front page of Metafilter, that's totally fine. -- cortex



 
Bags packed. Can you pick me up at the corner?
posted by From Bklyn at 1:26 PM on May 20, 2013 [2 favorites]


« Older Can I eat this?   |   Do white people have a future in South Africa? Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments