9 ms·

And to think that there is likely an Easy Mode system out there. A habitable planet on the low end of the mass spectrum needed for a stable atmosphere with oth

by cptaj 7y ago

And to think that there is likely an Easy Mode system out there. A habitable planet on the low end of the mass spectrum needed for a stable atmosphere with other habitable planets in-system. And all that close to another star with habitable planets, possibly in the sub-lightyear range. Basically everything ripe for a spacefaring civilization to grow without too much trouble and with plenty of motivation. The Earth is hard to leave and everything else in our system is dead rocks with hellish environments as far as we know with the nearest alternative at least dozens of lightyears away

zilian 7y ago
Maybe the Great Filter is real and screwing up a system is as easy as screwing up a planet ;)
- LeifCarrotson 7y ago
  ...why the winky face?
  - zilian 7y ago
    Why not ? Maybe sentient / intelligent life is thriving everywhere but 99.9% of time, climate change or nuclear annihilation happens. Even in "easy mode" with several planets. I find it ironic and somehow poetic.
    - LeifCarrotson 7y ago
      I believe (like many people) sentient/intelligent life to be intrinsically valuable, and the suffering or extinguishing of that life to be bad. Our own species suffers and harms itself far too much already. I like to think that we're doing relatively well, solving problems and navigating bad Nash equilibria and local optimizations with social systems and technology to make the world a better place. In as little as the last century, we've made huge strides in solving problems of hunger, illness, education, freedom of expression, and more. Even with the huge efforts needed to escape our heavy planet's gravity well with chemical rockets, and the limited habitability of other planets in our system, we're exploring the possiblity of colonizing other planets. To imagine that this is a hopeless fight, even at the best of odds - that sentient/intelligent life is not only unable to succeed but is actively continuously exterminating itself across the universe - is a ghastly, horrific, tragic nightmare.
MRD85 7y ago
Imagine an easy mode planet in a system with multiple habitable planets. Now that I've typed that I'm also considering how Mars would look from 12 light years away. Is establishing a colony 12 light years away easier than transforming mars into a habitable planet?
- jl6 7y ago
  Harder, I think. We have the technology to live on Mars (not to terraform it, just to survive on it). We have some ideas from physics about how to get to a planet 12 ly away, but not the technology. Nor, I would argue, do we have the social and political setup required for such a project, which would most likely take hundreds of years to get to a basic colony.
  - blotter_paper 7y ago
    > We have the technology to live on Mars (not to terraform it, just to survive on it). I'm not convinced this is true intergenerationally without a maternity ward in a centrifuge; the low gravity mouse embryo experiments don't look promising. Maybe 1/3rd earth gravity is enough, but I'm doubtful. If we're granting centrifugal habitats as something doable with current technology, an Orion/Daedalus style nuke-propelled spacecraft seems in the same ballpark. It's been sketched out and tested with models, it's clearly possible, but nobody has really made one yet and it's a hell of an engineering problem still.
    - kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
      We should be colonizing the moon first, then Phobos or Deimos. Then, once established, we can conquer the martian gravity well with local resources.
      - blotter_paper 7y ago
        I like Musk's plan of using Mars as a fuel-planet, I just don't expect a self-sufficient colony for some time. Mars is like an oil rig or a mineshaft; no place for children.
abtinf 7y ago
Or perhaps that’s ultra-hard mode. Multiple fantastically different independent intelligent species evolving on planets within shooting range of each other with basic industrial technology. If you’ve ever played civilization, it is a helluva lot harder to get started in Europe than in North America.
- codesushi42 7y ago
  You consider 12 light years to be within shooting range? Good luck with that.
  - abtinf 7y ago
    Well, that’s just a matter of time. But I was referring to the parent comment’s system.
    - codesushi42 7y ago
      It's also a matter of space. Maybe you are unfamiliar with the concept of space-time and what a light year really measures.
      - dwaltrip 7y ago
        You misinterpreted the comment. They were discussing a single star system with multiple habitable planets. If more than one planet in the system gave rise to an intelligent species that develops a civilization, things would likely get very interesting very quickly.
        codesushi42 7y ago
        Not likely. Even traveling to a planet as "nearby" as Neptune by conventional means would take 12 years. Hardly within shooting range, and who knows whether our civilization will survive long enough for us to make it to even the edge of our solar system. And the OP was referring to a nearby star system, within "sublight year" range. Even < 1 light year could mean very, very far away.
lrem 7y ago
From that distance, Venus and Mars both look potentially habitable.

by cptaj 7y ago

zilian 7y ago

Maybe the Great Filter is real and screwing up a system is as easy as screwing up a planet ;)

LeifCarrotson 7y ago
...why the winky face?
- zilian 7y ago
  Why not ? Maybe sentient / intelligent life is thriving everywhere but 99.9% of time, climate change or nuclear annihilation happens. Even in "easy mode" with several planets. I find it ironic and somehow poetic.
  - LeifCarrotson 7y ago
    I believe (like many people) sentient/intelligent life to be intrinsically valuable, and the suffering or extinguishing of that life to be bad. Our own species suffers and harms itself far too much already. I like to think that we're doing relatively well, solving problems and navigating bad Nash equilibria and local optimizations with social systems and technology to make the world a better place. In as little as the last century, we've made huge strides in solving problems of hunger, illness, education, freedom of expression, and more. Even with the huge efforts needed to escape our heavy planet's gravity well with chemical rockets, and the limited habitability of other planets in our system, we're exploring the possiblity of colonizing other planets. To imagine that this is a hopeless fight, even at the best of odds - that sentient/intelligent life is not only unable to succeed but is actively continuously exterminating itself across the universe - is a ghastly, horrific, tragic nightmare.

MRD85 7y ago

Imagine an easy mode planet in a system with multiple habitable planets. Now that I've typed that I'm also considering how Mars would look from 12 light years away. Is establishing a colony 12 light years away easier than transforming mars into a habitable planet?

jl6 7y ago
Harder, I think. We have the technology to live on Mars (not to terraform it, just to survive on it). We have some ideas from physics about how to get to a planet 12 ly away, but not the technology. Nor, I would argue, do we have the social and political setup required for such a project, which would most likely take hundreds of years to get to a basic colony.
- blotter_paper 7y ago
  > We have the technology to live on Mars (not to terraform it, just to survive on it). I'm not convinced this is true intergenerationally without a maternity ward in a centrifuge; the low gravity mouse embryo experiments don't look promising. Maybe 1/3rd earth gravity is enough, but I'm doubtful. If we're granting centrifugal habitats as something doable with current technology, an Orion/Daedalus style nuke-propelled spacecraft seems in the same ballpark. It's been sketched out and tested with models, it's clearly possible, but nobody has really made one yet and it's a hell of an engineering problem still.
  - kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
    We should be colonizing the moon first, then Phobos or Deimos. Then, once established, we can conquer the martian gravity well with local resources.
    - blotter_paper 7y ago
      I like Musk's plan of using Mars as a fuel-planet, I just don't expect a self-sufficient colony for some time. Mars is like an oil rig or a mineshaft; no place for children.

abtinf 7y ago

Or perhaps that’s ultra-hard mode. Multiple fantastically different independent intelligent species evolving on planets within shooting range of each other with basic industrial technology. If you’ve ever played civilization, it is a helluva lot harder to get started in Europe than in North America.

codesushi42 7y ago
You consider 12 light years to be within shooting range? Good luck with that.
- abtinf 7y ago
  Well, that’s just a matter of time. But I was referring to the parent comment’s system.
  - codesushi42 7y ago
    It's also a matter of space. Maybe you are unfamiliar with the concept of space-time and what a light year really measures.
    - dwaltrip 7y ago
      You misinterpreted the comment. They were discussing a single star system with multiple habitable planets. If more than one planet in the system gave rise to an intelligent species that develops a civilization, things would likely get very interesting very quickly.
      - codesushi42 7y ago
        Not likely. Even traveling to a planet as "nearby" as Neptune by conventional means would take 12 years. Hardly within shooting range, and who knows whether our civilization will survive long enough for us to make it to even the edge of our solar system. And the OP was referring to a nearby star system, within "sublight year" range. Even < 1 light year could mean very, very far away.

lrem 7y ago

From that distance, Venus and Mars both look potentially habitable.