THE END OF THE WORLD!

[Aristes]

Photons move exactly at the speed of light... FTL is physically impossible since it implies an infinite mass.

Claiming it to be impossible doesn't stop the guys from the University of Vienna from actually doing it in real, practical tests

Well, in my imperfect understanding, since I don't claim to be a scientist at any rate, the experiments are trying to establish an entanglement between photons which, in theory would mean that information conveyed by one would be conveyed simultaneously by the other. It's not a matter of moving faster than light, per se. It's actually more a matter of information being simultaneous because it needn't move at all since all information is exactly the same in both places at the same time.

 

I want to be clear, because I'm not trying to be clever and I would never take the devil on as a client. I don't disagree with the basic idea that we're moving along so swiftly, both in terms of science and the attendant technology, that moving out into the galaxy and establishing interstellar colonies is possible. I agree with Gorth, the smug bastard, that humanity is always taking on the impossible and making it possible. What I was trying to convey is that it's not a done deal. Maybe we will do it, but it's certainly not possible, at this moment or even with foreseeable technology based on current science, to create a lasting colony that exist independant of the sun outside of our solar system. It's not just a logistical problem, although we don't have the actual resources to build such a vessel and science has not yielded technology that would allow us to design such a vessel. Notice, we didn't say we'd colonize the Moon or Mars or even have a permanently manned space station. The argument was we'd move out of the solar system and survive the death of the Sun.

 

To say it will happen as a certainty is making a bold statement that is not supported by the facts. It is, no matter how you cut it, conjecture. Yes, science and technology (and I think it's stupid to say that it's a matter of technological advancement since, regardless of what we say, we do not have the technology to make any of this happen and thus it is entirely dependent on scientific discovery) have advanced at incredible rates over the previous decades. However, it is still an assumption that this will lead to a sentient species surviving the demise of the sun. It just is. If we're to be intellectually honest, that is the simple truth. You might think that it's a certainty, but it's not based on actual information. It's just based on history. Fair enough. I hope you're right. After all, who would want something as grand as humanity (or the sentient lizard folk who come after us) to die with the Sun?

Edited August 20, 2009 by Aristes

[Humodour]

Okay, we're going to house, feed, keep warm, keep cool, permanently power a space station crammed with enough people to last for centuries in the best forseeable fuel we will have available and my arguments regarding technological barriers suck?

 

Well, yes, because you have been arguing that the laws of physics might prevent us sorting out what are effectively logistical issues.

The Europeans are already doing experiments with FTL communication. If you can transmit info faster than light, then it isn't impossible to imagine FTL travel

 

I think they might be facing an uphill battle, since current quantum theory (which is admittedly by no means complete) seems to prevent FTL information transmission via entanglement... at least at full fidelity.

 

I can't see how FTL travel of fermions (i.e. us) would ever be possible by quantum entanglement (Edit: but that perhaps doesn't rule out other means of FTL travel). I do, however, see how you could devise a machine to construct a replica of something based on information sent FTL (if possible) via quantum entanglement. Destroy something at one end, recreate it at the other end.

 

Photons move exactly at the speed of light... FTL is physically impossible since it implies an infinite mass.

 

$10 says I can find you a photon that travels slower than the speed of light and, likewise, a particle (that's not a photon) that travels faster than the speed of light.

 

I am of course cheating by comparing speeds across different media (e.g. a vacuum vs water) and that brings me to the fascinating glow of Čerenkov radiation - emitted when a (charged) particle travels faster in a medium faster than the speed of light in that medium.

 

Edited August 20, 2009 by Krezack

[Humodour]

Maybe we will do it, but it's certainly not possible, at this moment or even with foreseeable technology based on current science, to create a lasting colony that exist independant of the sun outside of our solar system.

 

Bold claim! At this moment, I am not weaving a tapestry. I've never done it before, and I'd need to gather some resources and knowledge to do it, but if I wanted to, I could. Does that mean it's impossible for me to weave a tapestry?

 

This is not a question of science, Aristes, it's a question of technology. Again you conflate the two. Can we recycle organic matter and water? Yes. Speak to Europe. Or the ISS. Can we build novel power sources suited to the environment they'll be needed for? Yes - choose one. I'd opt for solar and nuclear personally. Can we shield our structures from radiation? Quite clearly - the astronauts on the ISS aren't dead yet, and nor are nuclear power station workers. Can we genetically engineer plants and bacteria to suit our needs? Yes - though we often don't because it gives people the heebejeeves. Can we repair existing human structures 100 years after they've been built? Yes. Can we repair structures in space? Yes. Can we build structures in space? Yes. Can we recycle and purify air? Yes. I mean exactly what part of science would prevent us (let's say the collective capacity of Earth, entirely devoted to the project, just to throw you a bone) from making a space colony right now if we wanted to, Aristes? Because you keep claiming this and I'm intrigued as to what I'm forgetting.

 

It's not just a logistical problem, although we don't have the actual resources to build such a vessel

 

I imagine Australia alone has plenty such resources lying around. Ask the Chinese. Just how big do you think this thing has to be?

 

and science has not yielded technology that would allow us to design such a vessel.

 

Who told you that? What aspect of physics do you believe prevents us from scaling our space ships to be 10, 100, 1000 times bigger, integrating all the things I mentioned above? Space doesn't care about aerodynamics, and I should think the existence of the space station would be evidence enough of the viability of creating a large, permanent manned structure in space.

 

This post has largely focused on a space colony, but similar considerations apply to a planet-bound colony.

[Aristes]

I don't know. I'll have to take your word for it because it seems so far fetched to me. On the other hand, I have to admit that I'm looking at it from a layman's point of view, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

 

My criteria, even for a chance to succeed, and that assumes that some unforseen variable doesn't scrap the whole thing is:

 

A self sustaining colony that can move out past the confines of the solar system

 

will be able to self repair from significant damage

 

will not be dependent on external supply for thousands or perhaps even millions of years

 

have steerage and mobility (ie the ability to go the direction it wants to go)

 

a reliable and renewable energy source sufficient to keep a large enough population to ensure the survival of the species

 

If you say that the technology exists to do that right now, then I'll leave the matter settled. No tricksies.

 

EDIT: One thing, though. I'm not conflating science and technology. At most, you can say that I did not know we have technology that currently exists. Discovery precedes technology. If we don't have the techno, we need to discover the principles by which it works and then develop it.

Edited August 20, 2009 by Aristes

[Walsingham]

What would happen if we hijacked the moon as the basis for this colony?

[Oner]

What would happen if we hijacked the moon as the basis for this colony?

Why not just build giant thrusters into earth?

[Gfted1]

Wow, are you guys optimistic about our capabilities. Its taken us over a decade to construct a facility that can house a whopping 13 people in space, but apparently thats only because we dont feel like doing bigger.

[Walsingham]

Wow, are you guys optimistic about our capabilities. Its taken us over a decade to construct a facility that can house a whopping 13 people in space, but apparently thats only because we dont feel like doing bigger.

 

We really desperately need aliens to come down and threaten to beat us up. That is the best way to motivate people.

[Oner]

Wow, are you guys optimistic about our capabilities. Its taken us over a decade to construct a facility that can house a whopping 13 people in space, but apparently thats only because we dont feel like doing bigger.

 

We really desperately need aliens to come down and threaten to beat us up. That is the best way to motivate people.

Funny thing is, it's true.

[Nihilus5078]

My best friend promised me a power armor if I help him conquer the galaxy. Anyone want to join?

 

I'll join! :lol:

[Nihilus5078]

My question is what will we do first, going to another planet or setting up space colonies in orbit at the gravitational lagrange points around our planet.

 

 

Sorry the colonies thing is stolen strait from the land of Gundam. I'd guess the colonies because of the sheer amount of time that'd be required to get between, say, mars and earth (the window of opportunity for mars launches are, I believe, a year + apart, due to orbital requirements).

 

I say build a Space Station planet! And if the Earth doesn't end, we burn the Mayans just as Judas, then behead them, if the world doesn't end, who wants a chainsaw! :lol:

[Calax]

In order to colonize other solar systems we'd need a ship that can move at relativisitc speeds, it can withstand something hitting it at said velocity, and is able to regenerate it's fuel and foodstuffs on a regular basis.

 

Also this sucker would probably be going so long you'd need to deal with things like the crew pairing off. And if you want to go further than alpha centauri you need to deal with the fact that probably a couple of generations are going to be on this thing for their entire lives.

[Walsingham]

I think we can make do with Aplha Centauri as phase one of the plan.

[Gorth]

Wow, are you guys optimistic about our capabilities. Its taken us over a decade to construct a facility that can house a whopping 13 people in space, but apparently thats only because we dont feel like doing bigger.

I think the biggest problem is to sell these projects to people. There are no tangible benefits in such projects, so it lacks the "no holds barred" monetary backing to make quantum leaps. People can see the immediate benefits of smaller, energy friendly cars, faster computers and crops that are resistant to pests, so that is where the research money goes.

[crazzycat]

Now it's going like you said but let us hope for the best

[Humodour]

Now it's going like you said but let us hope for the best

 

Are you a troll/bot?

[Gorth]

Now it's going like you said but let us hope for the best

 

Are you a troll/bot?

The latter I think. Skynet in the making.

[Nihilus5078]

Colonizing on the Moon!!!

[Walsingham]

Wow, are you guys optimistic about our capabilities. Its taken us over a decade to construct a facility that can house a whopping 13 people in space, but apparently thats only because we dont feel like doing bigger.

I think the biggest problem is to sell these projects to people. There are no tangible benefits in such projects, so it lacks the "no holds barred" monetary backing to make quantum leaps. People can see the immediate benefits of smaller, energy friendly cars, faster computers and crops that are resistant to pests, so that is where the research money goes.

 

You've clearly never worked in venture capital. people don't see the benefits of those things. they like big objects, objects that make loud bangs, and really really tiny objects which could either make them biullionairres or kill everyone. They don't like anything else, least of all energy friendly boringness.

[Humodour]

Wow, are you guys optimistic about our capabilities. Its taken us over a decade to construct a facility that can house a whopping 13 people in space, but apparently thats only because we dont feel like doing bigger.

I think the biggest problem is to sell these projects to people. There are no tangible benefits in such projects, so it lacks the "no holds barred" monetary backing to make quantum leaps. People can see the immediate benefits of smaller, energy friendly cars, faster computers and crops that are resistant to pests, so that is where the research money goes.

 

You've clearly never worked in venture capital. people don't see the benefits of those things. they like big objects, objects that make loud bangs, and really really tiny objects which could either make them biullionairres or kill everyone. They don't like anything else, least of all energy friendly boringness.

 

How very British of you.

[Humodour]

Wow, this is interesting: scientists can't find gravity waves. They're going to try again with an experiment 1000 times larger and if they still don't find any that's a pretty big shake-up of QM and string theory.

 

http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/08/21...Waves?art_pos=4

[Walsingham]

They can't find them? Well who had them last? Steve?

[Humodour]

They can't find them? Well who had them last? Steve?

 

I always suspect Mr. Jobs was up to something. Apple is buying up all the gravity waves!

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e0/Google

[Calax]

Well the thing is that as much as we know about Gravity we've never actually figured out how it works or is transmitted. the term graviton is used to describe the theoretical particle/wave thing that gravity is transmitted by but they aren't entirely sure where it is/how to find it.

[Aristes]

You people better stop scaring me! Plus, isn't that why it's the theory of gravity? I mean, we kind of take it for granted and it's not like we have anything better, but we still don't understand exactly how it works. As for myself, I just notice my weight increasing over the years. I take gravity for granted and figure that good ol' Newton had it right.