3 ms·

This will significantly limit humanity's ambitions to colonize outer space.

stakhanov 4y ago
Or increase them? Presumably some portion of humanity might be motivated by trying to get away from existing empires (maybe creating new ones, maybe not), rather than expanding existing empires.
kranke155 4y ago
Depends on the velocity. 1 light month is pretty big.
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  Within one light month of earth, there is only one solar system - the one containing Earth, obviously.
  - kranke155 4y ago
    Really ? Crap I thought we’d have a couple of star systems in there…
- onion2k 4y ago
  1 light month is pretty big. So is the universe. In fact, 1 light month gets you across 0.00000000061% of it. If your empire on Earth was the same size it'd be 300 square meters. About the size of a big house with a nice garden.
jerf 4y ago
Fortunately, while this study may exist, imperial ambitions know no bounds, so we'll colonize just fine. Sure, decades later, they may break away, but that's decades later's problem. Plus, this analysis is implicitly in the context of a world where the regions have the ability to be self-sustaining on at least the basics of life, so breaking away is a viable option. If the "empire" is also "your supply of oxygen", breaking away will be a lot trickier. For a space colony or set of colonies to be able to break away, they first have to be truly 100% self-sufficient, and that's a tall bar for the forseeable future. They then have to be able to militarily match what the empire is willing to throw at them to retain them, and that's a very complicated analysis, made all the more complicated by not knowing what the exact technologies will be at the time. (Plus, not all empires are complete buffoons. They at least begin being competently run. The empire will know that to break away the colonies must be self-sufficient, so they will take steps to ensure they won't be self-sufficient. And the colonies will take steps to become secretly self-sufficient. Long before open rebellions occur, there will have been a clandestine war of self-sufficiency.)
- svnt 4y ago
  The ambition of kings was unlimited, but we no longer live under monarchies.
glitchc 4y ago
Those colonies would simply become independent in a relatively short period of time.
zopa 4y ago
Why? Settling new places doesn’t have to mean expanding the existing polity: the settlements can be self-governing. See the Polynesian expansion through the Pacific, which to me is a closer (and more hopeful) analogy to space colonization than anything nineteenth-century Europeans or ancient empires did. And so long as we’re just thinking of this solar system, there’s also the question of whether what’s important is transit time or communication time. Historically those were identical; now very much not.
nextaccountic 4y ago
Unless the settlers form a democratic and self-governing society, not an authoritarian empire
- PeterisP 4y ago
  A society can easily be democratic and self-governing within itself but do authoritarian subjugation of other societies, or be subject to such.

Or increase them? Presumably some portion of humanity might be motivated by trying to get away from existing empires (maybe creating new ones, maybe not), rather than expanding existing empires.

kranke155 4y ago

Depends on the velocity. 1 light month is pretty big.

AnimalMuppet 4y ago
Within one light month of earth, there is only one solar system - the one containing Earth, obviously.
- kranke155 4y ago
  Really ? Crap I thought we’d have a couple of star systems in there…
onion2k 4y ago
1 light month is pretty big. So is the universe. In fact, 1 light month gets you across 0.00000000061% of it. If your empire on Earth was the same size it'd be 300 square meters. About the size of a big house with a nice garden.

jerf 4y ago

Fortunately, while this study may exist, imperial ambitions know no bounds, so we'll colonize just fine. Sure, decades later, they may break away, but that's decades later's problem. Plus, this analysis is implicitly in the context of a world where the regions have the ability to be self-sustaining on at least the basics of life, so breaking away is a viable option. If the "empire" is also "your supply of oxygen", breaking away will be a lot trickier. For a space colony or set of colonies to be able to break away, they first have to be truly 100% self-sufficient, and that's a tall bar for the forseeable future. They then have to be able to militarily match what the empire is willing to throw at them to retain them, and that's a very complicated analysis, made all the more complicated by not knowing what the exact technologies will be at the time. (Plus, not all empires are complete buffoons. They at least begin being competently run. The empire will know that to break away the colonies must be self-sufficient, so they will take steps to ensure they won't be self-sufficient. And the colonies will take steps to become secretly self-sufficient. Long before open rebellions occur, there will have been a clandestine war of self-sufficiency.)

svnt 4y ago
The ambition of kings was unlimited, but we no longer live under monarchies.

glitchc 4y ago

Those colonies would simply become independent in a relatively short period of time.

zopa 4y ago

Why? Settling new places doesn’t have to mean expanding the existing polity: the settlements can be self-governing. See the Polynesian expansion through the Pacific, which to me is a closer (and more hopeful) analogy to space colonization than anything nineteenth-century Europeans or ancient empires did. And so long as we’re just thinking of this solar system, there’s also the question of whether what’s important is transit time or communication time. Historically those were identical; now very much not.

nextaccountic 4y ago

Unless the settlers form a democratic and self-governing society, not an authoritarian empire

PeterisP 4y ago
A society can easily be democratic and self-governing within itself but do authoritarian subjugation of other societies, or be subject to such.