Send It Somewhere Special

[Heraclitus]

The article

Link

Consider the International Space Station, that marvel of incremental engineering. It has close to 15,000 cubic feet of livable space; 10 modules, or living and working areas; a Canadian robot arm that can repair the station from outside; and the capacity to keep five astronauts (including the occasional wealthy rubbernecking space tourist) in good health for long periods. It has gleaming, underused laboratories; its bathroom is fully repaired; and its exercycle is ready for vigorous mandatory workouts.

The only problem with this $156 billion manifestation of human genius -- a project as large as a football field that has been called the single most expensive thing ever built -- is that it's still going nowhere at a very high rate of speed. And as a scientific research platform, it still has virtually no purpose and is accomplishing nothing.

I thought this was going to be another anti-space rant. But I read onwards.

The guy is right. The US space program has done nothing in the past 50 years. China should be allowed into the ISS program. Orion is pathetic. The space station should be modified into a space ship.

My rant that has nothing to do with the article

We all know that the US has been loosing its place as the premier explorer of space and has cut NASA's budget each year for too long a time. This is unlikely to change. But perhaps after the US leaves us Euros, Canadians and Japs the keys, we can do a bit of home improvement and go explore the solar system while America's plays in its Lunar sandbox.

We should go back to being our imperialistic selves and start working on space colonization.
Have we lost that spirit that drove us to enslave millions of people across the world and paint the map pink/blue/grey?

The world is nearly all parcelled out, and what there is left of it is being divided up, conquered and colonised. To think of these stars that you see overhead at night, these vast worlds which we can never reach. I would annex the planets if I could; I often think of that. It makes me sad to see them so clear and yet so far.

And the stars are empty! We can claim the land without pesky natives declaring independence or staining our boots with red blood (green is another matter).

There are too few of us on Earth and younger, reckless and more vital cultures have taken over. We should head out towards the Grey Havens and then sail towards
Valinor as all elder civs do.

[BeBMan]

Why would we need to colorize the solar system

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by BeBro
Why would we need to colonize the solar system

Because its there.


And because our destiny is either to expand or die. Sustainable development is a noble lie. Yes we can be more friendly to Earth in our exploitation of it, but the fact remains that we will always demand ever more from our homeworld. If humanity ever achieves stability and zero growth it will surely begin to decline. Humans are no different than viruses in this regard, we exist to expand.


To spread our genes is to fulfill our only purpose.




Also for the more xenophobic among us, it may be the only way to preserve cultural diversity and Western civilization from the imminent collapse it will experience on Earth in the coming centuries.

PS Fixed that for you

[Lancer]

The point of going to the moon is helium 3. There's enough there to power the Earth for a thousand years.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Lancer
The point of going to the moon is helium 3. There's enough there to power the Earth for a thousand years.

The real question is why use helium 3? The fusion reactor at ITER won't so why would future ones?

[Lancer]

I'm an expert on super colliders, not fusion reactors.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by BeBro
Why would we need to colorize the solar system

Because we are not unlike the Minoans living on ancient Thera. Earth isn't eternally safe. There are plenty of ways for nature to frak things up and even things we can do ourselves. Colonizing space is the only way to better ensure our survival as a species. There are also resources that can be harvested from the abiotic environments of other bodies. Mining them won't harm Earth's biosphere. Anyway, this is all hypothetical until it isn't, but you have your honest answer: Not because it's there for the colonizing, but that we must colonize to survive.

[Elok]

Are you referring to unstoppable doomsday asteroids slamming into Earth? They could just as easily slam into another planet AFAIK. In fact, I can't see how the human race is safer on a planet completely hostile to life as we know it.

[Lancer]

Totally futile. The universe will burn itself out. If there are 1000 trillion people in it the suffering will be...

Better we limit births, reverse population expansion until we gradually depopulate the earth of people. That way the lives are worth living and the end of humanity becomes a philosophical choice intended to limit suffering. We are born into a universe that is governed by chaos if the scientists are to be believed. We live on a planet that has calderas that occasionally erupt and starve vast numbers of the members of all species, and which can be hit without notice from comets from the depths of space again starving us or our decendants. Our demise is inevitable. I suggest we bring it about on our terms and in a civilized manner.

[EPW]

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Lancer
Totally futile. The universe will burn itself out. If there are 1000 trillion people in it the suffering will be...

Better we limit births, reverse population expansion until we gradually depopulate the earth of people. That way the lives are worth living and the end of humanity becomes a philosophical choice intended to limit suffering. We are born into a universe that is governed by chaos if the scientists are to be believed. We live on a planet that has calderas that occasionally erupt and starve vast numbers of the members of all species, and which can be hit without notice from comets from the depths of space again starving us or our decendants. Our demise is inevitable. I suggest we bring it about on our terms and in a civilized manner.

If we do that, then who is left to make the next universe?

[Heraclitus]

Also why in the world is suffering relevant? And the trillions of people who would die can always opt for painless euthanasia.

In any case it is naive to think that those beings would be human. I expect them to be star system wide hive minds of god-like intelligence. Surely it is more appropriate to leave such a philosophical decision to them.

[Lancer]

I don't know, it wouldn't be our problem. Some other species might rise and we could leave them titanium monoliths with writings explaining to them how totally screwed they are.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Lancer
I don't know, it wouldn't be our problem. Some other species might rise and we could leave them titanium monoliths with writings explaining to them how totally screwed they are.

Why would humanity roll back and let future aliens play God? So far we haven't ever shied away from that pass time.


In any case humans could never agree on your course of action. We can't even agree on simple things! All your line of thought does is that it ensures that humans who don't find suffering of future generations relevant have an evolutionary advantage.

[Lancer]

This advantage of which you speak, is it to procreate unto untimely and inevitable death watching yourself (or your children or their children etc) and all those you love die around you in a horrific cataclism rather than peacefully by choosing not to have children? Thanks, I give that 'advantage' willingly. Anything else smacks of the very same chaos that is this universe.