3 ms·
On the one hand, I think it's sensible to assume we'll find something better or more suitable, but in the other hand, we're dealing with fundamental physics, no
by robbedpeter 4y ago
On the one hand, I think it's sensible to assume we'll find something better or more suitable, but in the other hand, we're dealing with fundamental physics, not consumer preference or any sort of abstraction away from function.
To produce food, we will need carbon. Structural materials will likely be steel or iron alloys. Energy storage works best with lithium for practical engineering reasons, and it's highly unlikely some other element will replace it.
The advantage of basic, high availability elements is you can pick up the raw material and process it almost anywhere. The distribution of elements is predictable, so unless you have a huge supply of unobtainium, it's better to use things you can scrounge on the way to or where you're going.
In a multi-species interstellar civilization, it's also reasonable to think that other starfaring technology will share similarity with your own - having a stockpile of lithium might mean you have a basic trade good.
- baking 4y agoIsn't phosphorus the true essential trade good? Necessary for life as we know it, but rare outside the solar system.
- robbedpeter 4y agoProbably - I think asteroid mining will give us the best picture of what's valuable in an interstellar context. If we figure out warp drive or wormholes for effectively ftl travel, the notion of value changes significantly. Wouldn't it be terrifying if we had the galaxy all to ourselves?