Mars and Off Planet Colonization - Pros and Cons Discussion

[ecarfan]

By then, however, we may have the ability to move the planet around, so it stays at just the right distance.

Even in my wildest dreams I can’t begin to envision how that might be possible. The amount of energy required is I suppose calculable but unimaginable for my puny mind.

note that the sun won't go nova. It'll just go red giant, then collapse into a white dwarf.

You’re right, thanks for the correction.

 

[Linkmeup]

Yes, and I would postulate that less than a thousand years from now, because of genetic engineering and AI and other things we cannot even imagine, humans will be almost unrecognizable by a visitor magically transported forward from the present, and human civilization will be completely transformed.

Our sun going nova is the least of my concerns when it comes to the future of humanity. Massive asteroids, the Earth cycling between a water covered sauna and a frozen snowball, and the radical alteration of the biosphere that we currently depend on are what occupy my mind.

I get where you're coming from, but I do think humans will remain human for those that decide to stay on Earth. If biology says anything, some species decide to find homeostasis in where they're at. Others...well want to go to certain places off-plant whether its space, planets, or star systems. I wouldn't doubt some people might choose to download their consciousness into data and, then, get put into a body that makes sense for the needs of the location they want to go to like another star system.

Personally, I do think we're going to see a massive amount of species proliferation in our lifetimes, at the least the beginnings of it, that gets us to Mars, Moon, and Space permanently...while still having a lot of us on Earth perfectly content with where we're at.

So glad to have found this thread!

 

[JB47394]

Even in my wildest dreams I can’t begin to envision how that might be possible.

"There's a Wikipedia page for that"

Moving Earth - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

If biology says anything

It says a lot less in humans than it does in animals in general. It's that whole frontal lobe thing.

 

[Ben W]

Even in my wildest dreams I can’t begin to envision how that might be possible. The amount of energy required is I suppose calculable but unimaginable for my puny mind.

The least implausible way to do it is to place a massive asteroid into a cycling orbit between Earth and Jupiter, transferring orbital momentum via gravitational slingshot with each pass. Even this would take millions of years to appreciably change Earth’s orbit, but in theory it could work.

Note that the question of how to set up the large asteroid is effectively the same question, but on a smaller scale. So setting up the whole thing would be a multi-step domino chain, starting with a small enough asteroid that could be moved with direct propulsion to nudge the next-bigger asteroid onto the desired trajectory, and so on. With enough precision, the directly-controlled small asteroid (or a few of them) could keep the entire domino chain synchronized.

 

[ecarfan]

"There's a Wikipedia page for that"

Of course there is! I should have known.

From that page:

This scenario has many practical drawbacks: besides the fact that it spans timescales far longer than human history, it would also put life on Earth at risk as the repeated encounters could cause Earth to potentially lose its Moon, severely disrupting Earth's climate and rotation. The trajectories of each encounter would need to minimize potential changes to the Earth's axial tilt and period of rotation.[4] Lengthening the Earth's orbital period would also lengthen its seasons, potentially causing disruptions to life at higher and lower latitudes due to extended winter and summer months, as well as causing significant changes to global seasonal weather patterns.[citation needed]Additionally, the encounters would require said asteroids or comets to pass close to Earth; a slight miscalculation could cause an impact between the asteroid or comet and Earth, potentially ending most life on the planet.[4]

Maybe humans will be capable of safely executing such a feat in a few thousand years, but I’m skeptical.

 

[Buckminster]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1790739864658526356

 

[ecarfan]

I can accept those numbers but I do not believe that in 30 years a Mars colony will be self sufficient, which is a requirement for the “civilization secured” goal.

If that actually happens it will take 50 to 100 years. Or quite possibly never. But worth the effort.

 

[TunaBug]

I can accept those numbers but I do not believe that in 30 years a Mars colony will be self sufficient, which is a requirement for the “civilization secured” goal.

If that actually happens it will take 50 to 100 years. Or quite possibly never. But worth the effort.

I interpreted it differently. Each of the first four lines is clearly a separate goal with it's timeline. I inferred that "civilization secured" is also it's own goal and that he does not have a timeline in mind.

Typical CEO or salesman talking. Say something they know you interpret one way while the vagaries of the statement allow different interpretations. You invest, and they're off the hook when you turn unhappy.

 

[ecarfan]

I interpreted it differently. Each of the first four lines is clearly a separate goal with it's timeline. I inferred that "civilization secured" is also it's own goal and that he does not have a timeline in mind.

Okay. My reading is that “civilization secured” is the goal that is accomplished by creating a city “for sure in 30”; it’s the conclusion. And my reading of Elon is that he actually believes that since in a few decades he envisions hundreds of Starships leaving for Mars every 26 months.

 

[EVCollies]

Emphasis on "instinctive", not "desire" or "motive". Whatever the reason, it is instinctive. Curiosity is instinctive. Instincts are simply what evolution has given us, and they aren't necessarily the best tools to have in our kit. The whole "fixing" thing is to review the toolkit and consciously restructure it. Think about all the negative instincts. Heck, you could say that my instinct for wanting us to stay on the planet and focus on us is a net negative.


Yep. That's been at the core of Christian teaching for 2000 years. It hasn't worked, though, because of our instincts overriding anything we can be taught. It's certainly had an effect, but there are limits even to the impact of Christ's teachings. For some reason, they never resonated in Asia.


Consider continued human evolution, driven by instinct, but augmented by technology. Most specifically, genetic modifications. Why not add wings? Or reduce the size of people (for our space-faring civilization)? Would a prehensile tail help? How about no longer needing to chew food? More eyes? Fur? Armored scales?

Why burden our bodies by hanging technology off of them when we alter our bodies so that the technology isn't needed?

Remember, five billion years.

I agree, humanity will change but don't see evolution as the driver but genetic engineering. We are currently experimenting with this approach.

How engineering animals and plants could help fight climate change​

I can accept those numbers but I do not believe that in 30 years a Mars colony will be self sufficient, which is a requirement for the “civilization secured” goal.

If that actually happens it will take 50 to 100 years. Or quite possibly never. But worth the effort.

The off world colonies will drive technology to improve Earth to Mars transport and beyond...