Stephen Hawking: Colonize space, or else

[n2doc]

by Chris Matyszczyk November 19, 2011 12:05 PM PST
In recent times, famed astrophysicist Stephen Hawking has become something of a hawk when it comes to human survival.

His fears have been profound. His warnings have been chilling.

He told us earthlings just last year that aliens might swoop down on us and devour us whole, while plundering what's worth taking from here. You know, a few Ferraris, an iPhone or two, Selma Blair, Yosemite, Aziza restaurant in San Francisco, and a couple of Himalayas just to look at.

Now, according to The Canadian Press, Hawking is adamant that we have to start colonizing out there before we endure a Waterloo down here.

more

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57328198-71/stephen-hawking-colonize-space-or-else/

[sarcasmo]

1. Where can I sign up?

[Bosonic]

2. It would be prudent to at least try to colonize the moon

It gives humanity more survivability over sub-solar extinction events.

[Antifa919]

28. May not happen for a long time

It will be some time before we can colonize other planets in any large scale. I think Mars will probably be colonized first because they have an atmosphere and less radiation.

Unfortunately as humans we are not ready for interplanetary colonization in any way or form. The first people will probably be linked with the military and it will only lead to a new arms race as industrialized nations try to colonize other planets, much as they colonized the New World.

[HopDavid]

39. Moon is more near term

The atmosphere at Mars is only 3 millibars. We would still need pressure suits. And not a sufficient protection against radiation. Dwelling would have to be underground at either moon or Mars.

Mars big selling point has been CHON (Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, Nitrogen). However Chandrayaan 1 as well as LRO and LCROSS have discovered CHON at the lunar poles. See http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/Mini-RF/multimedia/feature_ice_like_deposits.html>Ice Deposits at the Lunar poles.

Trip time to Mars is about 8 months. Trip time to the moon is about 5 days.

Launch windows open to Mars each 2.14 years. From a given earth orbit, lunar launch windows open each two weeks.

The moon is much more accessible in several ways.

[MineralMan]

3. It seems unlikely that any such thing will happen.

We can't even manage to maintain a manned space flight program in the US. I don't see any hope for progress in space in the near future. It's so expensive a proposition that it's difficult to maintain support for it for the long period of time that would be required. Further, there are no known habitable environments that are accessible to us. In our own solar system, inhabiting any body other than Earth would require artificial support systems that, like all such systems, are sure to fail at some point, disastrously, no doubt.

Without a habitable place near enough to this planet for us to travel, all colonization projects are doomed to never happen. There just isn't the required popular support for such programs.

[girl gone mad]

14. Costs are not an actual constraint.

Neither is public opinion. China understands these basic realities and, as such, they will likely be the first country to colonize space.

[jberryhill]

4. There is nothing worth taking here

Any raw material on earth is available in greater abundance elsewhere in the solar system, let alone other planetary systems to which such aliens might be able to travel.

[Sirveri]

6. The problem is the depth of the gravity well, not the materials.

Why strip mine earth when one can much more easily strip mine the asteroid belt, which is already broken into small easily digestible chunks and doesn't require escaping a gravity well or enduring an atmospheric entry.

[sylveste]

30. protien and chlorophyll ?

maybe, maybe not.

[tridim]

5. We need a space elevator first.

And a failsafe solution to the radiation problem which will kill every potential colonist before any colonization can occur.

[Sirveri]

8. the solution to radiation is simple. Lead. Cheap orbital lift capacity is correct though.

Get the uplift cost to under 500$/ton and we might be able to make a go of things.

[tridim]

10. Lead is heavy, toxic, and not a good building material.

It is somewhat practical on Earth, but not on Mars or the Moon.

The partial solutions I've seen rely on water as a radiation shield.

[Sirveri]

17. water works too, though you need 12 times as much.

I was a nuclear operator for the navy, all we did was sandwich the lead between two pieces of steel. Though for our secondary shield we did use a fuel tank as a radiation buffer, which was refilled with sea water as it was depleted. Since we'll need water anyways we might as well use it as shielding, however lead will be usefull for rotating areas.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

7. we should not spread the human contagion to other planets!

we should be quarantined here to deal with the mess we have made.

[baldguy]

9. If our ancestors had that attitude, we never would have left Africa.

Or the trees for that matter, much less Africa.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

13. did we leave africa because we'd trashed it and left it barren and toxic?

I must have missed that version of history in school.

[baldguy]

16. Have you ever seen what a herd of sheep will do to grazing land?

In a drought, an elephant might destroy a tree in order to get what food and little moisture it will offer. A herd will clear cut a forest.

Google "St. Matthew Island" and find out what happened to the reindeer there.

Homo sapiens isn't the only animal that will over-saturate it's ecological niche. To be able to survive at all, such species need to be able to colonize new environments. We're fortunate in that we can see & understand the effect that we have on the environment.

One thing you can guarantee: any group of individuals faced with ever-increasing numbers and ever-diminishing resources with no outlet or relief will use their limited time & energy to survive and prosper individually, and not show any concern on how to clean up their collective shit. It's a very dark future you're condemning humanity to.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

19. dark for humans maybe

if we're stupid enough to spend all that money and effort to try to colonize space instead of bettering the lives of our fellow inhabitants of this planet, and repairing some of the damage we've done... then we deserve that very dark future.

[Occulus]

33. What if an appreciable number of people leaving the planet reverses some of the damage?

[LongTomH]

11. Hawking has been saying that for some time now!

That was also the theme of Carl Sagan's book: Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space. After years of preferring robotic space exploration, Carl shifted his position suddenly after witnessing the impact of Comet Shoemaker-Levy IX on Jupiter.

[GeorgeGist]

12. At this stage of human development ...

it would be metastasis.

[Jim__]

15. We may be the only conscious beings in the universe.

We are also extremely likely to kill ourselves off on earth. Given those two possibilities, I agree with Hawking, we should colonize space. Consciousness is far too valuable to risk.

[Odin2005]

18. I see the misanthropists have popped up to post that humanity is a cancer.

:eyes:

[Viva_La_Revolution]

20. more like a parasite

I prefer that the most intelligent fascinating creatures on earth would pull their collective heads from their asses and realize that WE ARE DOING THIS TO OURSELVES. we have time to stop it, or at least mitigate the damage, but no.. we're gonna go look for more planets to consume.

[baldguy]

23. I guess the only species in the universe that doesn't have a right to exist is humanity?

If you're really worried about the future of this planet - don't be. As George Carlin said: It was here long before we came on the scene, and it'll be here long after we're gone. From the Earth's perspective we're just a minor, temporary irritant. The shit we've created that is ugly to us, and is harmful to us IS ONLY SHIT TO US! The area around Chernobyl has become haven for wildlife, as have the areas around our own nuclear weapons production facilities like Hanford and Rocky Flats. What is an unmitigated disaster for us on human timescales will barely register to the Earth on geological timescales.

Yes, we are doing this to ourselves, and we're the only ones it matters to. Mother Gaia doesn't care if we can't clean up our room. That doesn't mean she's going to stop us when we try to move out. And if we can't, and kill ourselves instead, she'll still be able clean it up in the fullness of time.

[roman7]

21. hes a smart fella alright but not as smart as he thinks he is

[laconicsax]

22. You're basing this on...what?

[roman7]

29. his flat statement that there is no god . he cant prove it .

[MarkCharles]

36. oh please, atheists have always been among the most intelligent in larger percentages

than among those of average mental abilities. Those of sub-average abilities tend to be more devout in their beliefs in a god, and also the most frequents to use their god as an explanation for phenomena well understood by scientists, things like sexual attraction. Those with less intelligence are likely to say their god sent them their life mate.

[ProfessorGAC]

25. Pot Calling The Kettle Black, I Think

GAC

[Johonny]

26. +1

[FiveGoodMen]

24. Won't help much

We'll never get a significant number of individuals off the planet and onto another one.

So it won't rescue anyone living.

It won't alleviate crowding on earth.

It might -- just might -- make it possible for something human to eventually live somewhere else.

But so what?

[LongTomH]

27. Carl Sagan's answer to those who say: "We're not worthy!"

Carl Sagan: "A message for the people of Earth". Carl took a longer view of the human race and its place in the cosmos. Most importantly, he believed in the human race and its potential for growth.

[bananas]

35. Sagan wrote, "If there is life on Mars, I believe we should do nothing with Mars..."

"If there is life on Mars, I believe we should do nothing with Mars.
Mars then belongs to the Martians, even if the Martians are only microbes."
- Carl Sagan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan

Sagan warned against humans' tendency towards anthropocentrism. He was the faculty adviser for the Cornell Students for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. In the Cosmos chapter "Blues For a Red Planet", Sagan wrote, "If there is life on Mars, I believe we should do nothing with Mars. Mars then belongs to the Martians, even if the Martians are only microbes."<50>

[hunter]

31. I figure space will be colonized by artificial beings...

... if it's not already.

It's too much trouble to keep natural humans alive in extreme environments. Space ships and space stations carrying humans are interesting, but synthetic intelligent beings who could walk around naked on the moon or mars would be much more practical.

We're getting pretty good with robot bodies, now we need to develop some robot brains. (No offense to GrovelBot.)

[Seagull6]

32. Atheist at Mass

Let's say you are a hard core atheist and your wife/partner is a devout Roman Catholic with advanced breast cancer. She is your soul mate and you love her dearly and want her to live forever. She is the mother of your children, your kayak buddy, your sailboat crew and hiking partner. There's no hope she will survive. She asks you to go to Mass, hold her hand and pray with her. Do you scoff at her faith and patiently wait until Mass is over so you can get out of there? Or do you pray your ass off and hope that she is right and you are wrong and that the Lord will save her? What do you do friends?

[FiveGoodMen]

34. Probably lie to make her feel better and pretend there might be a god

[Fumesucker]

37. Turn it around the other way..

It's the atheist of the couple that's dying, do you the believer try to change their mind and tell them they're going to hell if they don't convert and you'll be going to heaven so you'll be separated for eternity?

Or would you after they die apostate then renounce God so that you could be with your beloved spouse in hell?

[IDemo]

38. Much as I respect Hawking, his take on evil aliens is simply silly

For several reasons.

First, the degree of difference between any two civilizations technologically is highly likely going to be significant. The chances of us meeting up with another race with approximately the same level of advancement is effectively null when given the vastness and age of the cosmos. There will be no Star Wars scenarios in our future.

Secondly, what can we assume is the mindset of a civilization just beginning to probe beyond their solar system? They would understand perfectly well that they are at the low end of the spectrum technologically and would know that anything resembling an aggressive posture would very likely gain them an immediate and humiliating defeat from Others with millions or even billions of years of a head start.

Third, those civilizations which did succeed in contacting and interacting with others, assuming they had enough in common, would serve to reinforce the idea that good neighbors will accomplish much more than bad ones. In fact, as mentioned in paragraph one, bad neighbors will generally have been smacked out like an annoying fly or simply bypassed altogether.

And, any sufficiently advanced race, probably not even a great deal more than we are now, will be able to satisfy any material need without having to rely on mining the Earth or cannibalizing its inhabitants.