Thread: When will humanity expand into space?

One thing we, the inventors, the dreamers, the people who know we need to make this move, must consider is that - with our current driving force in the world - that is money - this will never happen. We must become a world that doesn't need money, before we will be able to build the seady flow of supplies needed to support life on another terra. Think about it. Everytime we left behind the "world we called home" and set out to begin again, we did it with very little or NO supplies, and we built a new world with what was there. We did this because our "home world" was so diseased that we left willingly, out of the highest desperation, in order to survive and continue. Now, we no longer have THAT as a reason to leave our world, because humans are so many that survival of every culture is secure. And money is the driving force (available to most of us, but not all). We would have to let go of the desire for money, to brave enough to make that desperate leap to another world. As long as the world economy is money based, it will never allow a colony to be built somewhere else - unless it can send us money. That sucks.....

Well my humble view is that space will ultimately be a free enterprise driven venture. I actually detest the idea of "space tourism" for its own sake and the hotel/bar/etc scenes that were mentioned earlier. Most, if not all, of the precious metal deposits that have been mined on earth actually originated from asteroids which impacted the earth millenia ago. That said, there is an entire belt of asteroids surrounding encircling the inner planets, all of which could host valuable resources including but not limited to expensive precious metals. In addition, I believe that if humans are to expand and proliferate throughout our native solar system, we are going to have to develop more efficient spacecraft than the (in my opinion dreadful) chemical rockets which are used to propel spacecraft today. Sure, they are cheap, but I remember reading that Project Orion, a nuclear design from the 50s, was capable of reaching Mars in 3-4 weeks as opposed to the 6-7 months for a one-way trip on a chemically propelled craft. I think the advantages of nuclear propulsion and power generation are self evident, and if it weren't for the politicians we would already be using it.

There are plenty of terraforming schemes that have been thought of, but I'll try to summarize some of the more (to me) believable ones. For one, Venus is often overlooked as a perpetually inhospitable planet, but the fact that Venus' atmosphere is roughly 90 times more concentrated than the Earths could play a significant advantage in the terraforming of the planet. There is actually a zone in the high altitudes where the atmosphere is stable at about 1 bar and 50-60 degrees fahrenheit. A somewhat far-fetched, yet scientifically feasible proposal is to basically set up giant "blimp-cities" which use helium as a ballast against the much heavier atmosphere. Helium filled blimps would be able to support massive cities because of the diifference in weight of helium and the heavy carbon dioxide and sulphur atmosphere. I think these floating cities could house chemical processing plants that could over time reduce the sulfur content of Venus' atmosphere to a habitable level, while idealizing the mixture of gases to match that of earths. In fact, if a "dual-venture" were set up simultaneously on Venus and Mars, Venus' atmosphere could possibly be condensed and exported to Mars, which has practically no atmosphere as of now.

Mars is a good prospect for terraforming, but a significant problem is that it is geologically dead, and a civilization there would either require a HUGE internal artificial magnetic field generator within the planet, local magnetic field generators in the main populated areas, or a thousands of square kilometer radiation shield set up between Mars' sun-facing surface and the Sun in order to protect from solar wind radiation. Another problem is, once again, mars has a pure CO2 atmosphere, but it is tiny at about 1% of earth's atmospheric mass. So large amounts of nitrogen would have to be imported, but possibly oxygen could be released from the icy poles.

A comment on the "Mars One" project and the like: utterly useless. Both the "Mars One" and the other one (I forget the name) are embarrassing. It is the most preposterous thing, to think that the greatest engineering feat in the history of humanity is going to be done in the name of a reality TV show "Space Bachelorette 2025." I highly doubt this project will ever get off the ground (no pun intended), but even if it does, what happens when the ratings go down, the organization loses funding, the "astronauts" on mars stop receiving supplies, and they starve and die? What an engineering wonder. The other "mission" which sends a man and a woman to orbit Mars one time and then fly home without ever even landing is equally pointless.

My favorite and I think the most prospective place to find life elsewhere in our solar system is Europa. I recently read that they have proven that there exist magnesium sulfate and other salts which bubble up onto the surface of Europa periodically, which absolutely indicates the presence of liquid water somewhere beneath the crust. I can imagine a huge, planet wide ocean teeming with life (a guy can dream), but even small microbial samples would be enough to blow away all of our concepts of religion and our place in the universe. I think it should be the primary objective of every scientific space agency to send probes or to collaborate on sending a mission to Europa, a mission which would orbit, land, and drill or melt into the icy crust and, if liquid water is found, insert a submersible probe into the ocean to explore.

Once we've developed immortality, we'll go to space. At a maximum. Assuming FTL travel is practically unfeasible, once we live forever, or at least much longer, we'll have the time to devote to space. Who wants to spend 60 years in a spaceship with current medical technology? NO ONE. Who wants to spend 60 years frozen in time (or learning a few languages/reading a library/playing engaging videogames and board games/developing meticulous art) going to some sweet-ass trilobite planet, and everyone will still be alive when you arrive/get back? EVERYONE.

I don't think we're ready to leave the vicinity of Earth to live now, but we're getting really close. However, there are lots of people who would love to do what you described.

Truth is, we're already expanded into space. China does not exist. It's all slave labor from Mars.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

Like Judaism.

Not sure how to take that... It almost sounds like you believe it.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

So long as one of the qualities we consider irrational is judaism, I'm on board with eugenics.

Oh, that answers my previous question!

I think it will be far more difficult than sci-fi and nasa lead people to believe... I bet it turns out we're far more intricately related to our environment than we realise and living anywhere else would require the re-creation of a habitate very similar to earth in all ways which would be ridiculously impractical.


There just aint no place like home, that's my guess...

Originally Posted by Hercuflea

A comment on the "Mars One" project and the like: utterly useless. Both the "Mars One" and the other one (I forget the name) are embarrassing. It is the most preposterous thing, to think that the greatest engineering feat in the history of humanity is going to be done in the name of a reality TV show "Space Bachelorette 2025." I highly doubt this project will ever get off the ground (no pun intended), but even if it does, what happens when the ratings go down, the organization loses funding, the "astronauts" on mars stop receiving supplies, and they starve and die? What an engineering wonder. The other "mission" which sends a man and a woman to orbit Mars one time and then fly home without ever even landing is equally pointless.

Your points, in this paragraph, are that the project is "utterly useless", "embarrassing", and "the most proposterous thing", and that another mission is "equally pointless."

I'm sorry to call you out, but I'm forced to call this paragraph "equally pointless", as it holds no actual points at all. It's really just a lot of name calling, is it not?

I believe it will happen. In inner space we will start by mars in my opinion. Now outer space will take much much longer.
But even inner space will take very long time. Humanity is more interested in destroy themselves with wars and non sense than exploring the universe together, like ONE (we are).

Originally Posted by sloth

Your points, in this paragraph, are that the project is "utterly useless", "embarrassing", and "the most proposterous thing", and that another mission is "equally pointless."

I'm sorry to call you out, but I'm forced to call this paragraph "equally pointless", as it holds no actual points at all. It's really just a lot of name calling, is it not?

Although if I was a betting man I wouldn't bet on Mars One succeeding to put people on Mars, it's not totally implausible. With SpaceX technology it could be done with a budget of only a few billion dollars, and that's no more than is spent on the average big Hollywood movie franchise over the course of a few years.

I'm not sure of the details of Mars One. I don't hold a lot of faith in our first steps into space. There will be death.
However, I think that as long as we don't blow ourselves up, or run out of critical ingredients, we'll make it out there.
Hawking said that it is possible that the reason we don't see aliens is because they blew themselves up already. ...I don't think he said it in those exact words lol.
Once we get to space, resources will be bountiful, and a large portion of war should go away, though we'll still find the inter-planetary drama that we seek, as a species.

I wasn't actually making a claim as to the success of any Mars mission, and was only picking on Hercuflea. He has several valid points in his post. I was only noting a paragraph of it.

Launching a mission, in order to shoot a television show, is probably a bad idea, as it offers nothing long term, unless they can somehow recycle the equipment, which is not likely. I think one could make a success out of a space mission if one could bring something back, and that's a lot more complicated than getting something out there. To fly, we basically sit on a ball of explosives, and it generally just lobs us into space. This requires, as far as I know, a launch pad, fuel reserves, and a way to attach those reserves to the ship... probably other things too. And, if you intend on making a profit, you'll need a mess of other stuff for that too.

Right now we are trying to find a way to make money however we possibly can, and even if those who are doing it are doing it wrong, at least someone is doing something.

We really ought to terraform at least one of the other planets in our solar system for no other reason than that we would achieve demigod status. I think that's worth investing in.

Just what we need, more land for the government to claim as their own and tax the shit out of.

Originally Posted by PlanesWalker

Just what we need, more land for the government to claim as their own and tax the shit out of.

The governments of Earth taxing Mars will be about as effective as England and France taxing the New World.

The government really shouldn't be anywhere in the picture, as long as space travel is privatized. What we will have to worry about is corporations claiming planets.

Originally Posted by sloth

The government really shouldn't be anywhere in the picture, as long as space travel is privatized. What we will have to worry about is corporations claiming planets.

A corporation can't claim a planet any more than a state can. The people ON the planet will naturally form their own scheme of homesteading and property allocation, and no one on Earth will be able to do a damn thing about it.

Originally Posted by cmind

A corporation can't claim a planet any more than a state can. The people ON the planet will naturally form their own scheme of homesteading and property allocation, and no one on Earth will be able to do a damn thing about it.

So, if Taco Bell sent a taco space ship to the Mars, and created a colony of Taco Bell workers, and they told them to create little taco houses and setup land allocation, and those Taco Bell workers complied, and spread throughout Mars, claiming it all in the name of Taco Bell, that would essentially defy the laws of physics, then?

The truth of the matter is that "claiming" something is a bullshit made up human term that can never be fully defined, and we're just too proud to admit that. Anyone can "claim" anything, as long as nobody objects to it.

Originally Posted by sloth

So, if Taco Bell sent a taco space ship to the Mars, and created a colony of Taco Bell workers, and they told them to create little taco houses and setup land allocation, and those Taco Bell workers complied, and spread throughout Mars, claiming it all in the name of Taco Bell, that would essentially defy the laws of physics, then?

Why would they do that? More likely the former employees of taco bell would realize that they have more in common with each other (eg. settling a new world) than they do with the company that hired them.

Originally Posted by sloth

The truth of the matter is that "claiming" something is a bullshit made up human term that can never be fully defined, and we're just too proud to admit that. Anyone can "claim" anything, as long as nobody objects to it.

Ok? I think you're agreeing with me.

Originally Posted by sloth

So, if Taco Bell sent a taco space ship to the Mars, and created a colony of Taco Bell workers, and they told them to create little taco houses and setup land allocation, and those Taco Bell workers complied, and spread throughout Mars, claiming it all in the name of Taco Bell, that would essentially defy the laws of physics, then?

The truth of the matter is that "claiming" something is a bullshit made up human term that can never be fully defined, and we're just too proud to admit that. Anyone can "claim" anything, as long as nobody objects to it.

I claimed the entire universe beyond Earth when I was in college. It's mine. I know the U.N. says nobody can do that, but who the fuck do they think they are?

^ Doesn't count unless you stuck a flag in it. And it better not have touched the ground!

Originally Posted by cmind

Why would they do that? More likely the former employees of taco bell would realize that they have more in common with each other (eg. settling a new world) than they do with the company that hired them.

.. Until that company threatens to stop sending the supply ship they utterly depend on for survival. Or are we talking about fully terraformed planets?

Originally Posted by cmind

Why would they do that? More likely the former employees of taco bell would realize that they have more in common with each other (eg. settling a new world) than they do with the company that hired them.

Irrelevant. The challenge was that a corporation is unable to claim a planet.

Originally Posted by cmind

Ok? I think you're agreeing with me.

I am agreeing that it's probably not going to happen, but I disagree about a statement that such an event is impossible. I also think that such a claim would be absurd, but not any more absurd than any other land claim. Humans like to make shit up, and as long as we all stroke one another on the idea, we can continue to believe it, as a whole, which makes it true to us. If you were to ask an alien race that has no concept of "ownership", however, they would just be confused.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I claimed the entire universe beyond Earth when I was in college. It's mine. I know the U.N. says nobody can do that, but who the fuck do they think they are?

Originally Posted by sloth

Anyone can "claim" anything, as long as nobody objects to it.

Since "claiming" things is a man-made concept, it is only valid as long as man, in general, allows it.
If you claimed the universe, and everyone agreed to your claim, then it is as valid as any other claim, though I think the entire concept is absurd.

Originally Posted by sloth

Your points, in this paragraph, are that the project is "utterly useless", "embarrassing", and "the most proposterous thing", and that another mission is "equally pointless."

I'm sorry to call you out, but I'm forced to call this paragraph "equally pointless", as it holds no actual points at all. It's really just a lot of name calling, is it not?

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

.. Until that company threatens to stop sending the supply ship they utterly depend on for survival. Or are we talking about fully terraformed planets?

This is what I meant in my earlier paragraph. I foresee a reality TV mission to lose funding quickly as the public loses interest and/or gets bored of watching people sit around and basically do nothing all day inside a white capsule on mars. There will probably be a huge initial income for a project like this because everyone wants to see it happen, but as reality sets in it probably wont make for a very popular show. And the consequences of that could really mean that the "astronauts" who go to Mars under such a program would die. The public would stop watching the show, the organization would lose its funds, and they would be unable to afford to send anymore supplies or a return spacecraft to the astronauts on Mars, and they would probably starve to death.

Originally Posted by sloth

The government really shouldn't be anywhere in the picture, as long as space travel is privatized. What we will have to worry about is corporations claiming planets.

I fully agree. I hope that private individuals and corporations are capable of exploiting space resources without government intervention. We have had government intervention throughout the history of humanity and it has caused nothing but death and destruction in the worst cases. Perhaps in the final frontier we can finally give anarcho-capitalism a chance? [/dreaming]

Originally Posted by sloth

Since "claiming" things is a man-made concept, it is only valid as long as man, in general, allows it.
If you claimed the universe, and everyone agreed to your claim, then it is as valid as any other claim, though I think the entire concept is absurd.

It's exactly how the Western US was settled.

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

.. Until that company threatens to stop sending the supply ship they utterly depend on for survival. Or are we talking about fully terraformed planets?

I don't see how that could happen in the real world. I understand how it could happen in your imaginary world, but the real world isn't like that. Corporations have shareholders, and shareholders don't like that sort of thing.

Originally Posted by sloth

Irrelevant. The challenge was that a corporation is unable to claim a planet.

A corporation is unable to claim a planet. It's just not possible. I'm afraid I don't understand your point still.

Originally Posted by sloth

The government really shouldn't be anywhere in the picture, as long as space travel is privatized. What we will have to worry about is corporations claiming planets.

Here, you say that you are worried that a corporation would claim a planet. Now you say it's impossible. You're flip-flopping.

The most practical reason to go into space is in order to mine resources. I'm the kind of guy that prefers economically motivated industry (as opposed to societally motivated infrastructure) be handled privately (though I believe the employees should own the company on a democratic level). While colonization is an important first step, the first to stake new territory are those dreaming of opportunity.

Unfortunately this won't be very pretty. Cmind is trying to romanticize share-holders to an unfair degree. If oil companies here are pushing fracking even though it's proven to cause earthquakes, if it's been proven Monsanto is killing the bees (which would kill us, too) and they're suppressing the studies rather than changing or being dismantled, you can fully expect some awful atrocities to accompany space exploration, as well.