5 ms·

Looks like someone has lost all hope for humanity and at that we should just accept our "inevitable" self-destruction. Even if the dream of colonizing mars is

Looks like someone has lost all hope for humanity and at that we should just accept our "inevitable" self-destruction. Even if the dream of colonizing mars is farfetched beyond fixing all of the problems we currently have on earth, it doesn't mean its not worth striving for. Goals like this drive people to do their best work and come up with creative solutions to problems that would otherwise never have been thought of. This is the exact kind of drive we need if we are to even have the chance at becoming interplanetary. Maybe we end up just getting to Mars and setting up an "antarctic" like lab that is occupied by teams for months at a time? That's fine. The innovation that got us even there would have been amazing. Maybe the goal then shifts to self-sustaining interplanetary spacecraft. Humanity isn't done yet, and not shooting for the far reaches of the galaxy is a waste of time that we cannot spare. Musk Co. isn't just focused on that interplanetary goal. There's a lot that is also being done to make this planet better and prolong its life. These are honorable and not nearly as farfetched goals. Musk's drive to solve these problems is a real inspiration to many and may be our only chance in hell to pass through the Great Filters.

ethbro 11y ago
> Great Filters Quick link for those who haven't read Fermi paradox et al. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter Inline summary for the lazy: If we don't see intelligent life, and the universe is as old as it is, then it must be unlikely for life to persist to a stage where we could detect it. This unlikeliness can come in two forms: either it's unlikely to ever be created (hurray, we won!) or there's some future stage that's it's unlikely to pass (uh oh us).
- tanishq1 11y ago
  To elaborate on the future stage, Carl Sagan suggested that technological civilizations tend to self-destruct (e.g. perhaps nuclear war.)
david-given 11y ago
!Mars != !Space. Mars is a dusty, barren deathtrap of a rock that's at the bottom of a very deep hole. The only thing to do on Mars is to _be_ on Mars. It's not (plausibly) terraformable, sustaining life there will obvious continuous and hugely expensive technical input, there are no resources there worth going there for, and once you've gone there, to get back you have to climb out of a hugely deep hole. Meanwhile the solar system is full of places that are easier to get to, more hospitable, more profitable, and which you can get away from. Asteroids. Comets. Ceres. The moon, even. Further afield, the rings of Jupiter and Saturn --- the radiation's a bit rough, but if you can survive there, you've got it made. Hell, if you're into planets, Venus is a better option. Did you know that there are parts of Venus which are a shirt-sleeve (and breathing mask) environment? Mars is fascinating, and there should absolutely be a science station there eventually, but it's not colonisation material. I certainly don't think it should be a priority right at this moment. With our current state of the art, I believe the Moon to be a much better choice.
- Numberwang 11y ago
  "Did you know that there are parts of Venus which are a shirt-sleeve (and breathing mask) environment?" Please expand on this.
  - Numberwang 11y ago
    Found some info myself. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Colonization_of_Venus https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Colonization_of_Venus
  - nine_k 11y ago
    Venus has a very thick atmosphere. At the height of a few miles above surface, there are layers with room temperature and human-acceptable pressure. Of course, the atmosphere is still CO₂ with some nasties, so a gas mask is required. But a Star-Wars-esque floating city would be quite manageable there. You can use hydrogen for floating because there's not oxygen around, so no risk of a blast. NASA is already working on it: http://www.cnet.com/news/nasa-wants-to-build-a-floating-city-above-the-clouds-of-venus/ http://www.cnet.com/news/nasa-wants-to-build-a-floating-city...

ethbro 11y ago

> Great Filters Quick link for those who haven't read Fermi paradox et al. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter Inline summary for the lazy: If we don't see intelligent life, and the universe is as old as it is, then it must be unlikely for life to persist to a stage where we could detect it. This unlikeliness can come in two forms: either it's unlikely to ever be created (hurray, we won!) or there's some future stage that's it's unlikely to pass (uh oh us).

tanishq1 11y ago
To elaborate on the future stage, Carl Sagan suggested that technological civilizations tend to self-destruct (e.g. perhaps nuclear war.)

david-given 11y ago

!Mars != !Space. Mars is a dusty, barren deathtrap of a rock that's at the bottom of a very deep hole. The only thing to do on Mars is to _be_ on Mars. It's not (plausibly) terraformable, sustaining life there will obvious continuous and hugely expensive technical input, there are no resources there worth going there for, and once you've gone there, to get back you have to climb out of a hugely deep hole. Meanwhile the solar system is full of places that are easier to get to, more hospitable, more profitable, and which you can get away from. Asteroids. Comets. Ceres. The moon, even. Further afield, the rings of Jupiter and Saturn --- the radiation's a bit rough, but if you can survive there, you've got it made. Hell, if you're into planets, Venus is a better option. Did you know that there are parts of Venus which are a shirt-sleeve (and breathing mask) environment? Mars is fascinating, and there should absolutely be a science station there eventually, but it's not colonisation material. I certainly don't think it should be a priority right at this moment. With our current state of the art, I believe the Moon to be a much better choice.

Numberwang 11y ago
"Did you know that there are parts of Venus which are a shirt-sleeve (and breathing mask) environment?" Please expand on this.
- Numberwang 11y ago
  Found some info myself. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Colonization_of_Venus https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Colonization_of_Venus
- nine_k 11y ago
  Venus has a very thick atmosphere. At the height of a few miles above surface, there are layers with room temperature and human-acceptable pressure. Of course, the atmosphere is still CO₂ with some nasties, so a gas mask is required. But a Star-Wars-esque floating city would be quite manageable there. You can use hydrogen for floating because there's not oxygen around, so no risk of a blast. NASA is already working on it: http://www.cnet.com/news/nasa-wants-to-build-a-floating-city-above-the-clouds-of-venus/ http://www.cnet.com/news/nasa-wants-to-build-a-floating-city...