http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/11/30/space.hawking.reut/index.html
Looks like that cameo appearance on ST:TNG really had an impact. I think he’s right. And you?
Well, I can say that his opinion on this matter holds as much weight as anyone else’s.
Certainly, there is some degree of risk that the Earth will be destroyed, or altered in such a way that it cannot support human life. The longer we project, the more likely that event will occur. If, at that point, all humanity lives on Earth (or is dependant on Earth for resources), humanity will no longer exist. So, yes. At some undefined point, humanity must move somewhere else (assuming we aren’t killing ourselves via non-environmental factors).
Whether or not this is something we ought to be concerned about is purely a matter of opinion. I say no. Not only because the immediate threat of Earth becoming unsuitable for human life is negligable, but also because I’m not entirely convinced that saving ‘humanity’ of the distant future is something worth wasting too much sleep over.
Being concerned about the next hundred or so years, sure. I think working towards nuclear disarmament is much more likely to benefit the future of mankind than developing self-sustaining colonies in outer space.
*note that I whole-heartedly approve of pursuing space colonization and exploration, just not for the reason Hawking proposes.
Of course. Staying on this rock forever has never been an option, IMO.
Ad astra per aspera.
I too could care less about saving humanity in the far distant future. But space colonization would revolutionize our culture, economy, government, etc. And it will give the entire population of Earth something to look forward to and work towards. Look to the past for reasons. The age of exploration changed the way we think, it made the entire world economy grow like crazy, and it gave every poor shmoe in the old world a chance to make something of himself in the new one if he just worked hard at it. I don’t see why this wouldn’t happen again with the colonization of space. The only thing stopping us is the percieved lack of economic incentive, but I forsee mining, all that unused energy getting dumped on lifeless planets, even farming if we could get it working, as incentive enough if we just get over the hump and go for it. Sure it will be expensive at first but once the engineers of the world start wracking their brains on the problems associated with space travel, it will get cheaper and cheaper as the rewards become bigger and bigger. To be honest I don’t see how anybody could think otherwise. Relatively speaking, we’re still in the middle ages. How can we refuse that spark that will ignite the world and transport us all into a new rennaisance?
Well, as someone who actually understands engineering and economics, I can’t comprehend how anyone can imagine that we can even think about colonizing other planets. Any mining, any terraforming, any colonizing, anything that you can think of doing on another planet in our solar system can be done cheaper, safer and more effectively here on earth. Mine asteroids? Cheaper and safer to mine deeper right here on earth. If we get to the point where we can terraform a planet, we should just go about fixing up this one.
In order to do anything “interplanetary” would require inventing completely different propulsion systems that are cheaper, more powerful and more efficient than what we have now by orders of magnitude. (and don’t bring up the stupid space elevator).
He speaking more from a practical, loooong term standpoint. We won’t have this Earth forever, so if we want humanity to survive, we need to get off of it.
Personally, I think humanity will kill itself if we don’t get off of this rock. But that’s just an opinion.
Is it possible for an entire species to be stir-crazy? I think so, even if we don’t know it.
All true (today)…but how will it help if a 500km rock smashes into the Atlantic ocean one gloomy day? Or if a large comet hits somewhere in central China. How cheap will it be to manufacture things on earth THEN? Just because we haven’t been hit with a dinosaur killer lately, doesn’t mean there isn’t one lurking out there somewhere with our name on it. And even a 50km rock could ruin our whole day depending on where and how it impacted.
I think that the future of mankind is among the stars. Oh, we aren’t ready to colonize Mars tomorrow, but we COULD be doing more of the baby steps that will be needed to make it happen a century or so down the line. Putting up space based industries and habitat might not be (initially) cost effective…but it will provide the needed engineering and science to push our skills and knowledge to deal with environment eventually. IIRC, the various European colonies weren’t immediately profitable either…they required huge amounts of logistics to get them up and running, and even after they were more or less self sufficient they still required capital and logistics support for years after. Eventually though they became profitable and self sufficient. I don’t see why we can’t begin the serious manned exploration phase now though…we’d increase our knowledge and abilities just by doing that. Colonization and space based industry/habitat could follow in a few decades, at least in our own solar system. Extra solar? Well, who knows…long duration sleeper ships are certainly not outside the realm of possibliity, and who knows what new technologies might spin off of a serious manned exploration/colonization effort here in our own neck of the woods.
-XT
All these living in space scenarios rely on a ridiculously optimistic view of scientific progress. I see no reason to think some kind of magic is going to happen to make such things possible. We can’t even get a shuttle in orbit without some of those damn tiles falling off.
Too right! And its simply ridiculous to speculate that someday we’ll put a man on the moon, or send a probe to Mars, or have the Chinese (the CHINESE for gods sake, say thankya!) could orbit a human! Preposterous…
Oh…wait…
-XT
This is only my opinion and that is what this thread seems to be about and generating, so, Yes!
We need to get all of our eggs out of one basket. I just have my doubts we will pull it off without some unexpected major break through to jump-start us. I fear we are at best centuries away from colonizing other star systems. I fear we will not have the economy left to promote such a program by that time. We need to start cleaning up our mess down here yesterday.
Possible Tech breakthroughs to help us on our way:
- Cheap, safe commercial fusion power.
- Nanotube Technology that will allow us to build a pair of space elevators to easily move mass from ground to orbit.
- Wide scoop Ram-Jet technology to provide us with the ability to travel and get to some reasonable fraction of light speed.
- Advanced hydroponics with lots of proven redundancies to make the trip.
Technologies I do not have much belief will occur:
- Cold-sleep technology to sleep our way to the stars.
- Warp Engines to achieve FTL flight
- Worm Holes or other inter-dimensional travel tricks
Jim
Out of curiosity, what do you think is the show stopper here making this impossible? From what I’ve read this is technology thats perhaps a century away…maybe less if there are some genetics/biological breakthroughs…something that seems fairly possible, what with the increased focus on genetics and bio-tech these days.
The other two I’ll agree with…however, there is nothing saying we couldn’t build a propulsion system that can achieve, say, .5c…or even .1c. THATS not impossible (though its not possible with our current technology, to be sure), and at those speeds several of the nearer solar systems are at least theoretically within reach of exploration and colonization. Even if they never solve the human hybernation problem ( :dubious: ), generation ships are a possibility…and if you could get speeds of .5c or even .1c you are only talking a few generations to get there.
-XT
A species becomes spacefaring, or it becomes extinct. That’s all there is to it. We either learn to manipulate the solar environment we find our selves in or we will die out by the inevitable rock.
That said we are at the very early stages of both exploitation and exploration. In my view we’re not taking about Columbus taking three caravels across the Atlantic, we’re talking about the ancient Greeks rowing to Britain in galleys.
Those are absolutely trivial accomplishments when compared to what is being discussed. (Colonization, 6 YEAR space flights, space mining, etc.)
Yay! The Chinese orbited a human. Just like we did decades ago. We haven’t really made such great progress in space exploration. It turns out it’s damn hard and crazy expensive. So we just have to believe we will be saved by some kind of Star Trek like scientific discoveries that will solve all these problems.
It might be simple ignorance on my part, but while I have seen many articles of achieving useable Fusion before the century is out and possibly within 30-40 years, I have never a single scientific article supporting the freezing and thawing of human tissue and having a living human when done.
The Ramjet would theoretically be able to achieve a very high fraction of the speed of light. I am not sure if the number would be as high as .5c but the Ramjet seems to be the theoretical technology with the best chance of being developed, so I listed it.
I mentioned proven hydroponics and ramjets. This should probably imply that I was also thinking in terms of long missions or even generation ships. Sorry for the confusion.
Jim
It was once calculated that a steamship could not cross the Atlantic because it could not carry enough coal.
While I’m both positive and optimistic about space colonization, how are things looking with regard to a big crunch? No perpetual existence anyway if such a party pooper ever comes around, y’know.
I really, really do believe that Mankind will do something very big…and very, very Evil to itself before we get the chance.
Wasn’t there a bloke who, in his infinite wisdom, prophesized that people couldn’t survive speed above 40 km/h? Isn’t that about running speed for athletes these days?
Getting people interested in these technologies is also a major stumbling point. We’re talking about huge amounts of money, and there’s no guarantee of results - in fact, there’s almost a guarantee that there won’t be immediate results. It’s hard to get people to look that far forward.
More pressing than extraterrestrial colonization, I think, is disaster-prevention. We have no ability to protect ourselves from meteorites or asteroids, and it looks like those things hit Earth more often than we thought. If we found one that was approaching, not only could we not move to another planet, we couldn’t defend this one. And we wouldn’t get more than a few days’ notice, I think.
Travel back in time 200 years and ask some coal-miner if he thinks that a big rocket full of electrical gadgets that takes people to the moon is trivial. Ask him if a cordless telephone that is the size of a packet of cigarettes and can be used to converse with someone halfway around the world is trivial. Ask him if a hand-sized disc that can show him a story with moving pictures on a 50" electronic screen with lifelike sound is trivial.
What makes you (or any of us) so special that, in 200 years time, you won’t be that same coal-miner?
What would that coal-miner say if he could witness a plasma screen showing King Kong on Blu-Ray, some yuppie idiot chatting on his Motorola or a frickin’ remote controlled car taking snapshots on Mars? He’d be dumbfounded. He’d say it was magic.
What have several people in this thread said in their dismissal of the technology required for space colonisation? It’s magical. Funny, that.