What kind of miraculous ideas have humans come up with in order to escape from the earth?

Since the last century, human beings have entered space for the first time and landed on the moon for the first time, and since then it can be said that every country will begin to explore space after its economic level has developed to a certain point. And as humans learn more and more about space, some ideas gradually become magical.

We all know that the great scientist Stephen Hawking once made a prediction: mankind must flee the earth within 100 years, or it will perish. We don't know how much of the truth of this prophecy is, but there are indeed many scientists who have studied this prophecy over the years, so today we will take a look at what kind of magical ideas human beings have put forward in order to escape from the earth?

First of all, if you want to escape from the earth, then you must choose a destination for interstellar migration, but we all know that if 100 years is the time limit, then with the speed of human technological development, it will definitely not be able to go far, and even the solar system will be difficult to get out. So the target can only be on other planets in the same solar system, and most scientists choose Mars.

We all know that the temperature on Mars can reach as low as more than 100 degrees below zero, and this environment is obviously not suitable for human survival. And in 1971, Carl Sagan came up with an idea to evaporate all the frozen water and carbon dioxide on Mars, so as to create an atmosphere for Mars, so that Mars can control the temperature, so that the temperature rises and warms.

Elon Musk has put forward an even more miraculous idea, that is, to detonate tens of thousands of nuclear warheads at the poles of Mars, which can make the ice caps at the poles of Mars melt, releasing a large amount of water vapor and carbon dioxide. Moreover, nuclear bombs will release a lot of heat, which can make the Martian environment warm rapidly, but most people do not agree with this idea.

Although scientists have come up with many amazing ideas, none of them are perfect and feasible, and scientists are so eager to immigrate to Mars, so many people think that the earth is really dangerous? In fact, although the current environment of the earth has deteriorated, it is far from dangerous, and the migration to Mars is only in the stage of imagination, and it is impossible to realize it in the short term.

In order to escape from the earth, people imagine immigrating to other planets, choosing a planet with a suitable living environment to settle in, and people's exploration of other planets has never stopped.

First of all, if you want to escape from the earth, then you must choose the destination of interstellar migration, but we all know that if you take 100 years as the time limit, then the speed of human scientific and technological development will definitely not be able to go too far, and even the solar system is difficult to go out, so the target can only be placed on other planets in the same solar system, and most scientists choose Mars.

In 1971, Carl Sagan came up with the idea of vaporizing all the frozen water and carbon dioxide on Mars, thus creating an atmosphere for Mars, allowing Mars to control the temperature and thus warm the temperature. But the difficulty of operation can also be imagined.

It takes the power of oneself to destroy the earth in a second. Because only this terrifying power can realize this idea of oneself.

I think the only thing I can do is to use nuclear **, which is the only way at the moment, otherwise it is impossible, but I think it is better to survive.

You're right, not strictly speaking.

For two reasons:

1. The train throws apples, that is, the Galilean frame of reference for the ideal uniform linear motion, which is not affected by the motion state of the carrier, because it is a uniform linear motion.

But the Earth's ground is not an inertial frame of reference.

The plane has a rotational horizontal initial velocity along with the ground when taking off from the ground, but the higher the altitude, the greater the difference in the results of the effect that the ground is not translational.

Theoretically, the plane should land on an imaginary surface that is flattening at the same tangential speed as the ground, like a train. The actual ground, however, is turned around the center of the globe by the pull of the earth. The fall point of the imaginary surface and the starting point of the ground will inevitably not coincide.

The effect of the force here is more complicated, the direction of gravity of the earth is directed to the center of the earth, and the plane flies "flat throwing" but not "flat throwing", because the direction of force is not always perpendicular to the direction of initial velocity, but changing all the time, that is, because while rotating around the earth, the direction of force is also rotating. However, it will not coincide with the take-off point, because the farther away from the center of the earth the radius is larger, and the same initial velocity will cover a longer distance (whether there is a quantitative proof here is debatable).

You can think of it as the many layers of the atmosphere have a variety of complex air movements.

It depends on how high the plane flies, the direction of the air currents and winds at that time, and which layer of the atmosphere it flies to.

If the effect of inlet airflow is taken into account, it is much larger than whether the ground is translated or not to make a difference in the results.

The Galilean frame of reference is the inertial frame of reference. The definition of an inertial frame of reference is: a frame of reference in which Newton's laws of motion can be established are called inertial frames.

Whether a frame of reference is an inertial frame or not can only be determined by experiments. The most basic criterion is whether Newton's laws of motion are true or not. According to Galileo's principle of relativity, a frame of reference that remains at relative rest or in a state of linear motion with a relatively uniform velocity with an inertial frame is also an inertial frame.

In practice, people always choose an approximate inertial frame of reference according to their actual needs.

For example, the Earth is a good inertial frame when studying the motion of objects on the ground in a small area. The Sun is a good inertial frame when it comes to studying the motion of celestial bodies in the solar system.

No, no, no.

You get the idea.

For example, if you're on a train, and the train is moving, and you throw an apple upward, the apple won't fall behind.

It's not an apple, a balloon, or a remote-controlled plane on a train, anything, and it's all about the train.

Everything on the train moves together, including the air, and the air on the earth moves with the earth. Unless you fly into space.

He also gains the same inertia as the rotation of the earth, as his friend downstairs said, if he throws an apple on a train moving at a constant speed, the apple will not fall into the hands of the person behind him. This is a physical law of motion, not a matter of geography.

Of course, the whole atmosphere is rotating synchronously, can you breathe American air by standing still on the ground for half a day?