Comment by elashri 7 days ago
Wow, this gives a reflection about our future. The nearest potentially habitable planet known is Proxima Centauri b, which orbits the red dwarf star Proxima Centauri about 4 light‑years from Earth (at least it is in a habitable zone of its star) [1]. So we don't have a choice actually except protecting and make sure our planet survives. That's regardless if it really would be able to support life as we know or not (probably not).
I showed my 6 year old son Powers of Ten a few nights ago and I think I accidentally gave him an existential crisis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEHCCsFFIuY
Try that to give him a sense of awe. Watch it on a big screen, all the way to the end.
In my opinion, if we really want a presence off of earth we'd be better off building larger and larger space habitats and bootstrapping a mining industry in space.
Daniel Suarez [1] has written a book where he imagined how this could happen (Delta-v)
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Suarez_(author)
P.S. Read a lot of his book, great author
> if we really want a presence off of earth we'd be better off building larger and larger space habitats and bootstrapping a mining industry in space
This turns entirely on how human biology works in zero versus low gravity. (Same for spin versus natural, or linear, gravity.)
The experiments we need to be doing is building and launching space stations and planetary bases for mice.
Yep, so long as there are clear, positive incentives or it could become a corrupt, expensive boondoggle depriving ordinary people on Earth. And Mars ain't it except underground.
Nit: "earth" is dirt, but "Earth" is always capitalized when referring to the celestial body we inhabit.
Agreed. Once it becomes commercially viable to start building things in space, it'll take off on its own. There will be constant pressure to build faster, safer, more capable craft. Whether that will lead to something like FTL isn't possible to know, but at the very least it's a step towards a space-faring civilization.
I try not to succumb to this attitude. Humans are remarkably able to build systems and technology to solve complex problems. The fact that we aren't making the needed changes now fast enough doesn't rule out that we might as it becomes more apparently necessary, or that some new plan will emerge which helps dramatically.
But we also cannot get complacent thinking that it's future generations problem. We need a breakthrough yesterday.
Note that a journey to a star a 100 light years away where you accelerate and decelerate with a constant 1 g for each half of the journey only takes 9 years of subjective time for the traveller (hence the twin paradox). To Proxima Centauri (4.24 ly) the gain isn’t as dramatic, it would take 3.5 years of subjective time.
Of course, we aren’t anywhere near having the technology for that, and there may not be any suitable planets in that vicinity, but it also doesn’t seem completely impossible.
I have an optimistic view that building underground facilities on Mars/Lunar might not be a far-stretched idea. But I have never done any research into the idea so not whether it works or not.
Basically, reducing costs and tech requirements by going underground (since it is underground we do not need to terraform the planet, and it is less likely to leak oxygen to external environment). Digging dirts and stones is a solvable problem. So optimistically I believe this is just an engineering/cost problem.
Mars is less habitable than the least habitable state we could let the earth in without being extinct. This is silly.
Yeah it is a silly thought. But one can hope. I wish I could work in the space, or anything related.
Yes, the distances are mind-boggling. There are a few somewhat realistic solutions for making such a trip in the forseeable future. If you send something of significant mass, it is certain to take a long time. So we're either talking generation ships(§), embryo space colonization (growing into adults en route or at destination) or hibernation. That or a breakthrough in fundamental physics.
--
(§) Something like O'Neill cylinders with fusion as energy source could work
This old video is a beautiful and astounding demonstration of just how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big the Universe is, and where in all this endless space our dear favourite little Pale Blue Dot (Earth) resides:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X-3Oq_82XNA
We all Earthlings are extremely lucky to be alive and thriving (or trying to) in such a beautiful bountiful rarest-of-rare ecosystem that somehow survived and thrived despite all the vagaries and vastness of spacetime.
I think the video I have linked above is Google's tribute to this Power Of Ten video (linked below, thanks to user dtgriscom for sharing the link in another comment), a classic video that demonstrates the scale of the Universe from the micro to the macro perspectives in a scaling increase by a factor of ten for each scene.
Power of 10: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fKBhvDjuy0
Another relevant video (thanks to user christev for sharing the link): A Brief History of Geologic Time: https://youtu.be/rWp5ZpJAIAE
Absolutely humbling to realise how infinitesimally small and irrelevant our existence is, in the grand scheme of theme. Nature and science are amazing.
Add this one to your pile:
Or we learn how to make uninhabitable planets habitable. Would also help us “save” this one.
(Funny how we say “save the planet” when we really mean “save people/complex life”).
Given that there is very little interest in developing commons here on earth (especially new types of commons from whole cloth), the shape that "making uninhabitable planets habitable" would likely take is that of living in bubbles rather than some kind of broad-scale terraforming. This would intrinsically shape society towards top-down authoritarian control, rather than allowing for distributed individual liberty. In this light, Earth's bountiful distributed air, water, and wildlife should be viewed as a technological-society-bootstrapping resource similar to easily-accessible oil and coil stored energy deposits.
Some handwavy logic there, both on why bubbles instead of terraforming and also why authoritarian control given bubbles.
Unless we find the means to manipulate our own star or the orbit of Earth we most likely will not be around at that time. The sun's increased luminosity will boil us way earlier.
I think there are a few movies that made me realize how much the space is vast, empty and adverse to life.
I think it would be nice for people to take a look at them:
- Aniara (2018)
- High Life (2018)
and maybe in a less artistic view:
- Powers of Ten (1977) yt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fKBhvDjuy0