6 ms·
But then you should compare to other ways how to minimize that risk. Multiple lifetimes of trying to estabilish a self-sustaining colony on Mars sounds more dif
by yread 6y ago
But then you should compare to other ways how to minimize that risk. Multiple lifetimes of trying to estabilish a self-sustaining colony on Mars sounds more difficult than mapping all rocks in solar system larger than ~ 10km in diameter, monitoring their orbits and developing a technology to nudge them away/break them down.
And it's also something that sci-fi nerds would enjoy.
EDIT: it seems that we're quite well on our way to the first step, there are about 1000 near Earth asteroids larger than 1km, much less than previously thought
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-3881/aa8036#ajaa8036s4 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-3881/aa8036#...
- fighterpilot 6y ago> But then you should compare to other ways how to minimize that risk Agreed with this as well. I'm all for comparing those alternatives and weighing up costs and benefits. Just don't like the offhand dismissal we so often see (I'm not accusing the above poster of that) before that analysis has been done.