7 ms·

Colonization of Venus

121 points by simonebrunozzi 5mo ago

thijson 5mo ago
The issue with Venus and Mars is that there is no magnetosphere. Over geological time periods the hydrogen is slowly lost into space. All that CO2 in the atmosphere could become H20 given enough introduced hydrogen, and photosynthesis.
- Robotbeat 5mo ago
  Yes, geologic times, so like 100 million years or more, not relevant to human life timescales. But even Venus has substantial atmosphere still, including substantial amounts of hydrogen still (with enhanced deuterium concentration due to the atmospheric loss… which could actually be worth mining for nuclear power export). Making a magnetic field on those timescales is easy, tho, compared to the other challenges. If you cool Venus down, you can place superconducting wires around the equator to generate a magnetic field. This is much easier than the terraforming you had to do.
  - 21asdffdsa12 5mo ago
    So parallel inward orbiting solar sails?
  - pavel_lishin 5mo ago
    Would it be possible to have the wires floating in space, instead of placed down on the surface?
- glenstein 5mo ago
  My understanding is, insofar as we're talking about protection from radiation, Venus compensates for its lack of a magnetosphere with incredibly thick atmospheric cover that does the same work, in fact does it better than here on Earth. That's not to say we would say no to a magnetosphere if such a thing could ever be achievable.
- PaulHoule 5mo ago
  Venus has a lot of atmosphere but very little water, maybe 1/1,000,000 as much in the atmosphere as we have in the atmosphere + ocean. If you are interested in hyperlarge structures you could maybe spread out a really big foil to catch hydrogen from the solar wind and react it with oxygen in one form or another to make a large ocean.
- vidarh 5mo ago
  There's a degree of induced magnetosphere on Venus. Coupled with the atmosphere, you're far more shielded from radiation even floating high up in the Venusian atmosphere than on Mars.
- userulluipeste 5mo ago
  That induced hydrogen, which you're looking for, can very well be the material particles in the solar wind. They don't reach much the Earth because are mostly charged protons and thus collide with Earth's magnetosphere. However, the lack of a strong magnetosphere on Venus means that, once that carbon dioxide layer gets reduced to lower levels and the reactive (free) oxygen can stay below a certain altitude, that shower of hydrogen should naturally become water. Therefore, the key to water on Venus is the reduction of carbon dioxide levels and production of free oxygen. I've touched this idea before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26575155 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26575155
1970-01-01 5mo ago
It would be a colony constantly depending on Earth supplies and you would be constantly rebuilding it. Just like every other planet, nothing can permanently survive in upper atmosphere. It would be easier to have a massive ISS-style station in orbit, with a tethered cable elevator for research. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposing_Microorganisms_in_the_Stratosphere#Results https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposing_Microorganisms_in_the...
- Robotbeat 5mo ago
  Untrue. You can actually mine the Venusian surface for metals. Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen (the vast majority of the elements used by life) can be extracted from the atmosphere, as well as sulfur. So from an elemental standpoint, it actually could be self-sufficient. Not that you’d WANT to avoid trade with other planets, but it is possible. It is also possible to terraform Venus, although much more difficult than for Mars.
  - p2detar 5mo ago
    Terraforming is possible but colonizing worlds hostile to humans has always meant genetic engineering to me. We need to drop the Star Trek idea that we can explore space in the sacks of water we call bodies.
    - pavel_lishin 5mo ago
      Let's take the idea further, and borrow cstross's belief that canned apes will never colonize or explore anything, and only digital uploads into mechanical bodies will be destined for space.
  - 21asdffdsa12 5mo ago
    [flagged]
  - gwbas1c 5mo ago
    > although much more difficult than Terraforming is so conceptual at this point that I wouldn't take a hard stance on either being easier or harder. You never know what a few generations of studies will teach us; and what misconceptions we hold dearly that our descendants will laugh at us for.
whoisthemachine 5mo ago
If only Venus had a moon like ours to encourage rotation.
- 3form 5mo ago
  Moon actually slows down Earth's rotation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_acceleration#Effects_of_Moon's_gravity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_acceleration#Effects_of_...
- ultratalk 5mo ago
  Duplicate of my previous comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47887938 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47887938) If I remember correctly, the habitable-ish cloud layers have super-fast winds that circle the planet once every 4 days or so. [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_super-rotation
- kraquepype 5mo ago
  If you could increase rotation somehow and place a moon sizes object in it's orbit, maybe you could improve the magnetosphere and reduce volcanism by inducing plate tectonics.
empath75 5mo ago
Every time I read about colonizing another planet, I think about how we correctly don't want to colonize the bottom of the ocean or the Sahara desert because it would be completely uneconomical, and yet either would be much easier than this.
- missingdays 5mo ago
  What it would be much cooler
  - freedomben 5mo ago
    I know you're probably joking, but there is definitely a romanticism around "other planets." The "cool" factor is definitely a power variable.
- dullcrisp 5mo ago
  We’d have a settlement in the Sahara desert if it took six months to get there and there were something interesting there. We have one in Antarctica.
- atrus 5mo ago
  Yeah, and the fact that no one is doing "practice runs" on them is telling how serious any colonization effort really is. Zero chance of a successful mars city if we can't even colonize the trivial in comparison ocean.
- sl-1 5mo ago
  I agree. And how all of our meager steps towards trying to learn the pre-requisites of sustainable colonies (eg. closed cycle ecology) have failed miserably. For example Biosphere program (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 ). And the only working ecological system we can study is being destroyed by humanity and capital on record pace.
  - PaulHoule 5mo ago
    Biosphere 2 had the problem, not least, that it didn't have enough of an atmosphere to buffer swings of CO2 concentration between day and night. It's like "what did they think would happen?"
okokwhatever 5mo ago
clouds cannot be eaten yet to my knowledge.
- kbelder 5mo ago
  The bulk of what you eat is harvested air.
jfrirofj94mtfj 5mo ago
[flagged]
- jfrirofj94mtfj 5mo ago
  [flagged]
jmyeet 5mo ago
Obligatory Isaac Arthur reference [1]. I still think humanity's far future is in orbitals in space, not on planets and certainly not on planets as hostile as Venus is. I'm not sure how well living at 50km above the surface would work. You still need a lot of buoyance to float large structures. The atmosphere is also a solvable problem. One idea I've heard is using so-called "fusion candles". That is a fusion-powered device in the atmosphere that sends waste gas into space and waste matter to the ground in an equilibrium that keeps them airborne, all powered by fusion. You could extract carbon and/or oxygen this way from the plentiful atmospheric CO2. Still, if you ever got the atmosphere down to a non-hellish level at surface, the surface would still be covered with all sorts of exotics and metals, many of them toxic. You'd probably be looking at geologic timescales to rehabilitate it. But whenever these terraforming questions come up (often with respect to Mars), people really don't appreciate the scale and the energy budget required. The energy budget is many orders of magntidue what our civilization currently uses. If you have access to that much energy, there are far better options. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI-old7YI4I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI-old7YI4I
perilunar 5mo ago
Does no one read Gerard K. O'Neill anymore? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerard_K._O%27Neill#Space_colonization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerard_K._O%27Neill#Space_colo...
- Ajedi32 5mo ago
  Blue Origin does. https://www.blueorigin.com/destinations https://www.blueorigin.com/destinations And VAST https://www.vastspace.com/ https://www.vastspace.com/
mcc1ane 5mo ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47885739 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47885739
aaron695 5mo ago
[dead]
b65e8bee43c2ed0 5mo ago
space colonization, even if there were habitable planets within our reach, is not possible anymore. you could, for example, send a million settlers to Kepler-69420, and with the TFR of 1.5 - an unrealistically high number - the colony would be extinct in just a few centuries. 1m becomes 100k in 200 years and 10k in 400 years.
- nine_k 5mo ago
  I bet the colonists would be highly (self-)selected for many traits not common in the majority of the population, likely including the willingness to have many children. I suppose that colonists on other planets, like colonists on other Earth continents, would largely consist of people who are unhappy with the status quo at their origin, and would have some strongly-held ideas about a different way of living.
  - b65e8bee43c2ed0 5mo ago
    >likely including the willingness to have many children. why exactly do you find it likely? on the contrary, most of the colonists would need to be highly educated professionals for the colony to be self-sufficient, so they would be even less likely to have many children than average people. besides, in very near future, the TFR of 1.5 will pass for "willingness to have many children".
    - nine_k 5mo ago
      I don't think that the highly educated people who would join the expedition would at the same time be happy to se their colony die out, and would find it too onerous to have children and pass their knowledge and fervor to the next generations. Again, I don't think that a self-sustained colony on another planet would be organized by Earth governments, and by people who are happy to live on Earth. I bet on projects like (the declared) Musk's Mars colony, and even more, on religious groups (remember Mayflower). It takes a lot of grit to leave the comforts of Earth and go live in highly inhospitable and limiting conditions of another world, for life. Do not compare it to traits of a typical middle-class college-educated coastal city dweller. Those are going to be very different people, with very different views on everything, including fertility and raising children.
antiquark 5mo ago
One shudders to think of the difficulties of launching and landing space vehicles on these balloon-supported platforms.
- readthenotes1 5mo ago
  At least two...
zackmorris 5mo ago
If anyone wants breadcrumbs, I just did a deep dive and there are a couple of promising technologies that could terraform Venus on roughly a human timescale of 100 years: * Sun shade/sail near L1 tipped up to 35 degrees to remain still: 5 micron polymer film (1.5-3.5 billion tons or 10-25 million SpaceX Starship launches at 150 tons each) or 50 layer graphene (15 thousand tons or 100 launches). Liquid CO2 ocean forms at 31 C or 88 F, or dry ice glaciers at -78 C or -108 F result in nitrogen atmosphere dropped from 92 times pressure to close to Earth's pressure. Shade rotation can simulate a 24 hour day. * Comets to increase water and spin rate: 50-100 100 km diameter comets from Kuiper Belt at 30 AU, nuclear rocket using 1% of water to gravitationally slingshot comets by planets over 20-100 years to impact at equator, resulting in 50 day retrograde or 64 day prograde rotation (down from 243 days). Decreases temperature and sulphuric acid enough for microbes to start fixing CO2 and acid. The "hard" parts are getting bots into orbit to blow graphene bubbles to form a honeycomb, and inventing open-ended fusion rockets to avoid containment issues. 5 cm by 50 cm graphene sheet grown in 20 minutes: https://www.nature.com/articles/srep21152.pdf https://www.nature.com/articles/srep21152.pdf (warning PDF) Direct fusion drive: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094576523000632 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009457652... (PDF available) Magnetic mirror concept for open-ended fusion rocket: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_mirror https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_mirror Magnetic reconnection thruster: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caM94mem5K4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caM94mem5K4 I think the sun shade is probably how we'll slow global climate change until we can plant the 1-10 trillion trees it will take to reverse it (mechanical carbon capture can't be scaled enough practically), but I digress. Note that the blocker is actually getting to low Earth orbit (LEO) since delta V is straightforward with ion engines. That will arguably be a solved problem once big "dumb" rockets like Starship scale. I'm a big fan of JP Aerospace's airship to orbit concept and other magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) craft, but it's unclear if they will be able to achieve heavy lift. Aerospike engines and exotic rockets are being evolved by AI currently.
- WalterBright 5mo ago
  Mechanical carbon capture is a joke. There's no way it can scale enough to be measurable. It also requires energy - coming from where? Trees, on the other hand, can scale, and they get their energy from the sun.
slim 5mo ago
colonizers gonna colonize
ck2 5mo ago
Not this century. Just like Mars not this century. Humans cannot survive long-term space travel, yet, the technology does not exist The radiation alone will kill you and then there is the problem is you will go blind from changes in your body and brain fluids

121 points by simonebrunozzi 5mo ago

The issue with Venus and Mars is that there is no magnetosphere. Over geological time periods the hydrogen is slowly lost into space. All that CO2 in the atmosphere could become H20 given enough introduced hydrogen, and photosynthesis.

Robotbeat 5mo ago
Yes, geologic times, so like 100 million years or more, not relevant to human life timescales. But even Venus has substantial atmosphere still, including substantial amounts of hydrogen still (with enhanced deuterium concentration due to the atmospheric loss… which could actually be worth mining for nuclear power export). Making a magnetic field on those timescales is easy, tho, compared to the other challenges. If you cool Venus down, you can place superconducting wires around the equator to generate a magnetic field. This is much easier than the terraforming you had to do.
- 21asdffdsa12 5mo ago
  So parallel inward orbiting solar sails?
- pavel_lishin 5mo ago
  Would it be possible to have the wires floating in space, instead of placed down on the surface?
glenstein 5mo ago
My understanding is, insofar as we're talking about protection from radiation, Venus compensates for its lack of a magnetosphere with incredibly thick atmospheric cover that does the same work, in fact does it better than here on Earth. That's not to say we would say no to a magnetosphere if such a thing could ever be achievable.
PaulHoule 5mo ago
Venus has a lot of atmosphere but very little water, maybe 1/1,000,000 as much in the atmosphere as we have in the atmosphere + ocean. If you are interested in hyperlarge structures you could maybe spread out a really big foil to catch hydrogen from the solar wind and react it with oxygen in one form or another to make a large ocean.
vidarh 5mo ago
There's a degree of induced magnetosphere on Venus. Coupled with the atmosphere, you're far more shielded from radiation even floating high up in the Venusian atmosphere than on Mars.
userulluipeste 5mo ago
That induced hydrogen, which you're looking for, can very well be the material particles in the solar wind. They don't reach much the Earth because are mostly charged protons and thus collide with Earth's magnetosphere. However, the lack of a strong magnetosphere on Venus means that, once that carbon dioxide layer gets reduced to lower levels and the reactive (free) oxygen can stay below a certain altitude, that shower of hydrogen should naturally become water. Therefore, the key to water on Venus is the reduction of carbon dioxide levels and production of free oxygen. I've touched this idea before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26575155 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26575155

1970-01-01 5mo ago

It would be a colony constantly depending on Earth supplies and you would be constantly rebuilding it. Just like every other planet, nothing can permanently survive in upper atmosphere. It would be easier to have a massive ISS-style station in orbit, with a tethered cable elevator for research. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposing_Microorganisms_in_the_Stratosphere#Results https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposing_Microorganisms_in_the...

Robotbeat 5mo ago
Untrue. You can actually mine the Venusian surface for metals. Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen (the vast majority of the elements used by life) can be extracted from the atmosphere, as well as sulfur. So from an elemental standpoint, it actually could be self-sufficient. Not that you’d WANT to avoid trade with other planets, but it is possible. It is also possible to terraform Venus, although much more difficult than for Mars.
- p2detar 5mo ago
  Terraforming is possible but colonizing worlds hostile to humans has always meant genetic engineering to me. We need to drop the Star Trek idea that we can explore space in the sacks of water we call bodies.
  - pavel_lishin 5mo ago
    Let's take the idea further, and borrow cstross's belief that canned apes will never colonize or explore anything, and only digital uploads into mechanical bodies will be destined for space.
- 21asdffdsa12 5mo ago
  [flagged]
- gwbas1c 5mo ago
  > although much more difficult than Terraforming is so conceptual at this point that I wouldn't take a hard stance on either being easier or harder. You never know what a few generations of studies will teach us; and what misconceptions we hold dearly that our descendants will laugh at us for.

whoisthemachine 5mo ago

If only Venus had a moon like ours to encourage rotation.

3form 5mo ago
Moon actually slows down Earth's rotation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_acceleration#Effects_of_Moon's_gravity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_acceleration#Effects_of_...
ultratalk 5mo ago
Duplicate of my previous comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47887938 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47887938) If I remember correctly, the habitable-ish cloud layers have super-fast winds that circle the planet once every 4 days or so. [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_super-rotation
kraquepype 5mo ago
If you could increase rotation somehow and place a moon sizes object in it's orbit, maybe you could improve the magnetosphere and reduce volcanism by inducing plate tectonics.

empath75 5mo ago

Every time I read about colonizing another planet, I think about how we correctly don't want to colonize the bottom of the ocean or the Sahara desert because it would be completely uneconomical, and yet either would be much easier than this.

missingdays 5mo ago
What it would be much cooler
- freedomben 5mo ago
  I know you're probably joking, but there is definitely a romanticism around "other planets." The "cool" factor is definitely a power variable.
dullcrisp 5mo ago
We’d have a settlement in the Sahara desert if it took six months to get there and there were something interesting there. We have one in Antarctica.
atrus 5mo ago
Yeah, and the fact that no one is doing "practice runs" on them is telling how serious any colonization effort really is. Zero chance of a successful mars city if we can't even colonize the trivial in comparison ocean.
sl-1 5mo ago
I agree. And how all of our meager steps towards trying to learn the pre-requisites of sustainable colonies (eg. closed cycle ecology) have failed miserably. For example Biosphere program (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 ). And the only working ecological system we can study is being destroyed by humanity and capital on record pace.
- PaulHoule 5mo ago
  Biosphere 2 had the problem, not least, that it didn't have enough of an atmosphere to buffer swings of CO2 concentration between day and night. It's like "what did they think would happen?"

okokwhatever 5mo ago

clouds cannot be eaten yet to my knowledge.

kbelder 5mo ago
The bulk of what you eat is harvested air.

jfrirofj94mtfj 5mo ago

[flagged]

jfrirofj94mtfj 5mo ago
[flagged]

jmyeet 5mo ago

Obligatory Isaac Arthur reference [1]. I still think humanity's far future is in orbitals in space, not on planets and certainly not on planets as hostile as Venus is. I'm not sure how well living at 50km above the surface would work. You still need a lot of buoyance to float large structures. The atmosphere is also a solvable problem. One idea I've heard is using so-called "fusion candles". That is a fusion-powered device in the atmosphere that sends waste gas into space and waste matter to the ground in an equilibrium that keeps them airborne, all powered by fusion. You could extract carbon and/or oxygen this way from the plentiful atmospheric CO2. Still, if you ever got the atmosphere down to a non-hellish level at surface, the surface would still be covered with all sorts of exotics and metals, many of them toxic. You'd probably be looking at geologic timescales to rehabilitate it. But whenever these terraforming questions come up (often with respect to Mars), people really don't appreciate the scale and the energy budget required. The energy budget is many orders of magntidue what our civilization currently uses. If you have access to that much energy, there are far better options. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI-old7YI4I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI-old7YI4I

perilunar 5mo ago

Does no one read Gerard K. O'Neill anymore? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerard_K._O%27Neill#Space_colonization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerard_K._O%27Neill#Space_colo...

Ajedi32 5mo ago
Blue Origin does. https://www.blueorigin.com/destinations https://www.blueorigin.com/destinations And VAST https://www.vastspace.com/ https://www.vastspace.com/

mcc1ane 5mo ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47885739 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47885739

aaron695 5mo ago

[dead]

b65e8bee43c2ed0 5mo ago

space colonization, even if there were habitable planets within our reach, is not possible anymore. you could, for example, send a million settlers to Kepler-69420, and with the TFR of 1.5 - an unrealistically high number - the colony would be extinct in just a few centuries. 1m becomes 100k in 200 years and 10k in 400 years.

nine_k 5mo ago
I bet the colonists would be highly (self-)selected for many traits not common in the majority of the population, likely including the willingness to have many children. I suppose that colonists on other planets, like colonists on other Earth continents, would largely consist of people who are unhappy with the status quo at their origin, and would have some strongly-held ideas about a different way of living.
- b65e8bee43c2ed0 5mo ago
  >likely including the willingness to have many children. why exactly do you find it likely? on the contrary, most of the colonists would need to be highly educated professionals for the colony to be self-sufficient, so they would be even less likely to have many children than average people. besides, in very near future, the TFR of 1.5 will pass for "willingness to have many children".
  - nine_k 5mo ago
    I don't think that the highly educated people who would join the expedition would at the same time be happy to se their colony die out, and would find it too onerous to have children and pass their knowledge and fervor to the next generations. Again, I don't think that a self-sustained colony on another planet would be organized by Earth governments, and by people who are happy to live on Earth. I bet on projects like (the declared) Musk's Mars colony, and even more, on religious groups (remember Mayflower). It takes a lot of grit to leave the comforts of Earth and go live in highly inhospitable and limiting conditions of another world, for life. Do not compare it to traits of a typical middle-class college-educated coastal city dweller. Those are going to be very different people, with very different views on everything, including fertility and raising children.

antiquark 5mo ago

One shudders to think of the difficulties of launching and landing space vehicles on these balloon-supported platforms.

readthenotes1 5mo ago
At least two...

zackmorris 5mo ago

If anyone wants breadcrumbs, I just did a deep dive and there are a couple of promising technologies that could terraform Venus on roughly a human timescale of 100 years: * Sun shade/sail near L1 tipped up to 35 degrees to remain still: 5 micron polymer film (1.5-3.5 billion tons or 10-25 million SpaceX Starship launches at 150 tons each) or 50 layer graphene (15 thousand tons or 100 launches). Liquid CO2 ocean forms at 31 C or 88 F, or dry ice glaciers at -78 C or -108 F result in nitrogen atmosphere dropped from 92 times pressure to close to Earth's pressure. Shade rotation can simulate a 24 hour day. * Comets to increase water and spin rate: 50-100 100 km diameter comets from Kuiper Belt at 30 AU, nuclear rocket using 1% of water to gravitationally slingshot comets by planets over 20-100 years to impact at equator, resulting in 50 day retrograde or 64 day prograde rotation (down from 243 days). Decreases temperature and sulphuric acid enough for microbes to start fixing CO2 and acid. The "hard" parts are getting bots into orbit to blow graphene bubbles to form a honeycomb, and inventing open-ended fusion rockets to avoid containment issues. 5 cm by 50 cm graphene sheet grown in 20 minutes: https://www.nature.com/articles/srep21152.pdf https://www.nature.com/articles/srep21152.pdf (warning PDF) Direct fusion drive: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094576523000632 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009457652... (PDF available) Magnetic mirror concept for open-ended fusion rocket: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_mirror https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_mirror Magnetic reconnection thruster: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caM94mem5K4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caM94mem5K4 I think the sun shade is probably how we'll slow global climate change until we can plant the 1-10 trillion trees it will take to reverse it (mechanical carbon capture can't be scaled enough practically), but I digress. Note that the blocker is actually getting to low Earth orbit (LEO) since delta V is straightforward with ion engines. That will arguably be a solved problem once big "dumb" rockets like Starship scale. I'm a big fan of JP Aerospace's airship to orbit concept and other magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) craft, but it's unclear if they will be able to achieve heavy lift. Aerospike engines and exotic rockets are being evolved by AI currently.

WalterBright 5mo ago
Mechanical carbon capture is a joke. There's no way it can scale enough to be measurable. It also requires energy - coming from where? Trees, on the other hand, can scale, and they get their energy from the sun.

slim 5mo ago

colonizers gonna colonize

ck2 5mo ago

Not this century. Just like Mars not this century. Humans cannot survive long-term space travel, yet, the technology does not exist The radiation alone will kill you and then there is the problem is you will go blind from changes in your body and brain fluids