[DefiledEngine]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')So Basil do you know if the formula of Entropy Collection would hold true here on Earth?

[turp182]

Saw this on Digg. link First off, Steven Hawking is smart. Second, the article makes it clear that Steven Hawking is a doomer. But he’s not seeing the entire picture.

What he fails to see is that the political will to pursue such goals can’t exist (why waste all that money on the future when we could spend it on Social Security now?). As well, the economic situation (energy availability) for such expansion is now coming to an end with the advent of Peak Oil.

His vision might have been possible and even realized today if the space race had continued at the same pace as seen in the 1960s. But it didn’t. End of story.

It's interesting to see a knowledgeable outsider (not thinking about oil) commenting on the future of life on Earth. But understanding the complete set of implications (the "we can't really do anything about it" implications) can be a depressing thing.

[grabby]

You can be smart and ignorant at the same time. Steve is ignorant on peak oil. and he certainly does not understand the finer points of life such as gasoline prices, he probably hasn't filled up his car for how many years now?

Go to space? shoot we will all be without oil before the first man hits mars. he just doesn't understnad we are doomed before we could complete any space lifestyle. how would you like to be sent into space, then society shuts down? No more million dollar care packages.

Space is useless and extravagant. There is nothing up there and we will never make the planets. It takes energy to go into space and we have no more. We aren't going to be making anti-matter any time soon, and we Don't have the energy to do that, and radiation is a killer.

We are not meant for space and it isn't going to happen, for any significant amount of people except for important military satellite missions.(priorities)

[whereagles]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('grabby', 'S')tephen Hawking needs a calculator.

[EnergyUnlimited]

Assuming, we have a fusion power, travelling around Solar System would be viable.
PO would not hamper that much.
However there is not much use of travelling around Solar System (albeit seeing surrondings of Io would be cool experience).

It might just be possible to visit closest alien stellar systems using this technology, but it would be nice if we know first what we can find out there (not impossible task by the way).
In any case sending a single mission would be an effort of large part of humanity lasting for many years.
If the objection is to stick somewhere US/Russian/Chinese flag and come back with few pieces of rock, than adventure is pointless.
On the other hand if runaway GW leading to Venus scenario is underway we may bundle dosen of people into a box and send to some destination few light years away if we suspect that there is a habitable planet there.
The chances of success would be a small fraction of percent perhaps, but if it works we could fuck up yet another planet.

[NeoPeasant]

Wasn't this one of JD's big things? Sending a few dozen colonists into space might in theory preserve the human race from eventual extinction, just as a few dozen tigers in zoos may preserve tigers from extinction.

But for the bulk of the race, the prognosis is just as grim.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NeoPeasant', 'W')asn't this one of JD's big things? Sending a few dozen colonists into space might in theory preserve the human race from eventual extinction, just as a few dozen tigers in zoos may preserve tigers from extinction.

[mfire]

Although a lot of resources are required to visit the moon and Mars, you have to keep in mind that there will be resources there. The moon has huge depositsof Helium-3. Mars also has it's own energy sources. Some scientists have interesting ideas about using greenhouse gasses to warm and terraform Mars.

I really hope that we are able to pull it off. If asteroids, war and what not don't get us, the sun will eventually destroy the earth as it grows. We may be screwed here on Earth, but at least life has a chance if a few people manage to colonize other planets and systems. Solar sails look like a promising way to escape the solar system.

We certainly don't have a way for everyone to escape the Earth, but a few of the wealthyand most powerful elitemight be able to carry on the human race. Most of them probably aren't the ones I would like to have start a new world... but it's probably better than risking the possible end of intelligent life in the universe.

[EnergyUnlimited]

mfire,
There is a thread on this forum about mining a moon for He-3.
It appears to me, that this project has no reasonable chance of success (negative EROEI very likely).

Solar sails:
Lets say that you had managed to escape Solar System (as few already sent space probes will do without solar sails at all), than with the mentioned technology about 50 000 later you will approach nearest alien star called Alpha Centaurii.
Without fusion (at least) or antimatter (better) or warp drive (excellent) forget exploring Galaxy/Universe.

Warming a Mars:
Theoretically possible but you will have to wait dozens of millions years for the result.

Sun burning people on the Earth:
Dont worry about that. It will be about 5 billion years from now.
Homo sapiens will not be here at that time as evolution will change it beyond recognition. It may not even have intelligent descendents by the way (or it may blow himself up earlier not waiting for evolution).

Wealthy & powerful escaping:
They will not even take g-forces involved in going to Earth orbit, let alone going anywhere further.

End of intelligent life in Universe:
Unlikely for a very long time (I do not think we are alone).
Anyway, Thermal Death of Universe will finish off all intelligent life anyway.
You know, stars will go dark, hadrons will decay to leptons (means no atoms), black holes will evaporate etc.

[Sys1]

I'm not interested about the space colony BS story, as peak oil will imho stick mankind on Earth.
But i would like to know where are the arguments/statistics which allowed Stephen Hawking to think that we could face a runaway global warming...
Anyone?

[thuja]

Let's see: in the past 5-10,000 years, humans have multiplied almost exponentially, growing to inhabit the entire planet. We have used our brains and opposable thumbs to extract as much lumber, mineral and fossil fuel resources from the Earth. This has led to mass extinctions and human induced global warming which threatens all life throughout the planet...

And we want to repeat this experiment by colonizing planets in outer space. Hmmm. Me thinks not.

Maybe if humans survive this mess, in time we will gain enough wisdom to keep it small and simple. But I doubt it. Space exploration is just an extension of our desire for more, farther, deeper, longer, better. Its like a junkie who needs to up his dose every couple weeks so he can at least maintain his high. Just get off the needle. No space travel for you!

[mfire]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sys1', 'I')'m not interested about the space colony BS story, as peak oil will imho stick mankind on Earth.
But i would like to know where are the arguments/statistics which allowed Stephen Hawking to think that we could face a runaway global warming... Anyone?

[dogf]

Maybe Stephen Hawking is assuming as I believe he should, that there will always be oil available, just not in a feasable amount for the general public. Therefore his assumptions that space travel is doable, is probably based on the fact that the government, assuming it is still viable after TSHTF will be able to do these things. Plus call me crazy, but you and I who have time to read this forum and make posts between calls and the boss walking by, Hawking has a little more thinking time under his belt based on his inability to do much else and he must be apprised of the PO issue.

[mfire]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', 'T')here is a thread on this forum about mining a moon for He-3. It appears to me, that this project has no reasonable chance of success (negative EROEI very likely).

[mfire]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sys1', 'I')'m not interested about the space colony BS story, as peak oil will imho stick mankind on Earth.
But i would like to know where are the arguments/statistics which allowed Stephen Hawking to think that we could face a runaway global warming...
Anyone?

[Kingcoal]

Hawking is far smarter than anyone on this forum. He's absolutely right, the earth is not, nor has ever been stable enough to support any species beyond a couple hundred million years. In our case, we'd be lucky to survive even one million. Hawking's not a doomer, just a realist. The solar system is loaded with resources. I'd rather go extinct trying, than to just lay back and die. Let's use our remaining resources to explore the solar system, I can't think of a better use for them.

[Jellric]

Unfortunately the space program will likely become one of the first casualties of PO. Hell, it is barely on life support now even after Bush set a goal to return to the moon then to Mars with a pauper's budget.

And that is a shame because I consider exploration to be one of the few noble endeavors of mankind. Contrary to what one poster said, space exploration is not extravagant at all. It is not an expense, it is an investment. Space exploration has returned every dollar invested in it and more due to spin-off technologies. NASA has done a very poor job of informing the public of that fact, and space exploration has no natural constituency that will fight for a budget worthy of its goals.

With PO and other challenges looming on the horizon, colonies on the moon and Mars are looking better all the time.

[TITAN]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mfire', 'A')lthough a lot of resources are required to visit the moon and Mars, you have to keep in mind that there will be resources there. The moon has huge depositsof Helium-3. Mars also has it's own energy sources. Some scientists have interesting ideas about using greenhouse gasses to warm and terraform Mars.

I really hope that we are able to pull it off. If asteroids, war and what not don't get us, the sun will eventually destroy the earth as it grows. We may be screwed here on Earth, but at least life has a chance if a few people manage to colonize other planets and systems. Solar sails look like a promising way to escape the solar system.

We certainly don't have a way for everyone to escape the Earth, but a few of the wealthyand most powerful elitemight be able to carry on the human race. Most of them probably aren't the ones I would like to have start a new world... but it's probably better than risking the possible end of intelligent life in the universe.

[turp182]

The types of advances being discussed here require large amounts of time and money. That money requires healthy world economies willing to contribute money to such advances. The US is the only country that can come close to fulfilling those requirements. But.,..

Peak oil will be a destroyer of healthy economies.

NASA’s budget plan is quite upbeat (see budget outlook below). But how’s that going to play out in the face of ever increasing energy costs. Expansion in general will be limited; how’s the space exploration budget going to fare?

(Jellric, obviously you pointed this out, I had already worked this up)

Here’s the historical NASA budget:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Budget

Here’s the budget outlook (see page SUM 1-3):
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/142459main_FY07_summary.pdf

2005 NASA budget was about $16 billion.

Europe spends very little on space compared to NASA (2006 budget 2.904 billion Euros).

Oh, and Hawking is a doomer. He’s just suggesting possible solutions (but not solutions for all people). He points out how we won’t find another planet as nice as Earth unless we get to a different star system. Our current astronauts don’t fare well over long periods of time in space. Are there feasible propulsion systems that could get us close to the speed of light which would make extra-solar trips more possible? Where does the money for it come from? Without that alternate star system our options are poor, per Hawking. Honestly, I take this exact comment to mean that Earth, regardless of global warming situation, will still be a better habitat than the other planets in our solar system (at least for the next few million years of terra-forming, with the right budgets and technological prowess leaving the solar system is the only real alternative).

Don’t get me wrong. I love space. I wish the space program had continued at the same level and intensity of the 1960’s. I love to camp in Southern Illinois, miles from city lights, taking in the natural night sky (Fort Kaskaskia to be specific). I own From the Earth to the Moon and The Right Stuff is one of the best movies ever. But energy and resource availability into the future will be limited. This is what peak oil represents to me. The peak of our technological progress due to lack of resources which are consumed with disregard for the future.

Is there life out there? If there is then they would have to face the same resource issues we are facing. They would have to develop technology along a similar tree as ours (laws of thermodynamics and such; also too much Civ 4 which I see as ultimately flawed because of resource issues). We don’t even know what technologies would allow for inter-solar travel. Anyway, is there intelligent life out there? Probably. Are they are developed as we are (would dog level be intelligent)? I don’t know. Would they have inter-solar travel capabilities? I doubt it on instinct alone.

Evolution is why we consume resources as we do; it leads to very effective resource consumption (those that consume resources survive). This would apply to any ET.

Dang that got long.

ESA Budget (search for “budget”):
http://www.esa.int/esaCP/GGG4SXG3AEC_index_0.html