Interstellar colonization - Finally, a destination

BWhite · 2005-04-22 08:47:31

Our species ability to do it may be a thousand years away however the discovery of this http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, … html]solar system assures me that humanity will have a place to go, and thrive, if we leave the Sol system.

And as I recall, Tau Ceti has asteorid belt resources and is much closer.

= = =

If we can survive and thrive in the Main Belt between Mars and Jupiter we can survive and thrive at these other places as well.

Getting there? Okay that's still the hard part.

Cobra Commander · 2005-04-22 09:24:49

Indeed there is potential, though I shall cling to one of my few articles of faith, namely that Earth-like planets with biospheres aren't all that rare and Mars-like terraformable planets are plentiful. A great future awaits us, unless we bungle it.

"The best way to get on your feet is to get off your ass." Bumper sticker that came with a van I used to have. Applicable.

But yes, the whole getting there thing is a problem. Fortunately there is much to do in our own system to keep us busy and sharp, and travelling those distances is within our capacity. On to Mars, and the asteroids, and the Jovian moons, and the Saturn system <insert Howard Dean scream>

BWhite · 2005-04-22 11:27:14

Heh!

We are the Borg.

Palomar · 2005-04-22 11:40:25

http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=979]I thought this sounded familiar

--Cindy

(...sometimes the keeness of my memory sort of spooks even me)

reddragon · 2005-04-22 12:58:57

This asteroid belt is 25 times as large as ours. "George Rieke of the University of Arizona, another member of the team, said: 'Because this belt has more asteroids than ours, collisions are larger and more frequent, which is why Spitzer could detect the belt.'" This doens't sound like a very safe place to live or set up mining stations.

Even if we find a planet in the system that we can live on, it may be in the constant bombardment stage that Earth is thought to have experienced in its early history.

Quieter systems may be the best candidates for future homes for humanity.

Shaun Barrett · 2005-04-22 16:33:04

Apart from the probability of frequent bombardment of any suitable planets in a system like this one, I wonder whether an asteroid belt so close to the parent star might be too hot?
One of the chief advantages we foresee for asteroid mining in our own asteroid belt is the abundance of volatiles such as water and ammonia ices and carbon compounds etc. Is it not likely that small bodies orbiting at about 100 million kms from a star like our Sun would have long since lost all their volatiles to space because of stellar heating and the heat of frequent energetic collisions?
???
I don't like pessimism but then we do have to face reality - especially if we're contemplating going all that way (41 light years) and relying on finding the raw materials we'll need to survive.

Commodore · 2005-04-22 21:46:45

Instead of looking at random stars, why arn't we studying stars in order of their distance from earth? Just a pet peeve of mine.

In any case, if we can travel 41 light years, we can move the astroids to the most ideal place in the system and build massive space stations out of them. That system will be inhabited someday.

srmeaney · 2005-04-23 01:29:16

Yeah, that one annoys the hell out of me too. They can see gas giants orbiting some monstrosity of a star fifty light years out but cant or wont fully analyze the closest. Despite harboring fantasies of all the christians passing out after they find the rest of the universe doesn't believe in their god either, I must say that it would seem logical that as each advance in tecnology occurs, we would go back over what we have done to verify with greater accuracy all previous results.
Of course, now we know there were errors in the Micaelson-morley experiment and for the last hundred years and Eienstein's results were based on an incorrect assumption, no one has been keen to question the Scientific dogma. So perhaps that has set a trend of intelectual stagnation for all science.

After all they still burn you at the stake for heresy on this planet.

dicktice · 2005-04-23 07:44:56

"Scientific dogma" is an oxymoran if there ever was one. Your point that theoretical conclusions be reviewed is what scientific method is all about. So why ruin a perfectly valid argument with your "of course" remark ending in that silly expression? The final sentence re. "heresy" needs some clarification, unless you didn't expect a reply to that. Heresy makes no sense within the true science community because if it did, said community wouldn't be "scientific," right?

srmeaney · 2005-04-23 11:37:10

"Scientific dogma" is an oxymoran if there ever was one. Your point that theoretical conclusions be reviewed is what scientific method is all about. So why ruin a perfectly valid argument with your "of course" remark ending in that silly expression? The final sentence re. "heresy" needs some clarification, unless you didn't expect a reply to that. Heresy makes no sense within the true science community because if it did, said community wouldn't be "scientific," right?

Now who said community was scientific?

You know what they will tell about the first genius to build a fusion drive for space travel? He was building what is inherently a bomb yet isnt one of us in the mainstream scientific hierarchy of peer reviewed development. Logic therefore tells us that he was not a recognised scientist but rather a terrorist.

or if you prefer: "He did this, and was rather startled to discover that he had managed to create the long sought after golden infinite improbability generator out of thin air.
It startled him even more when just after he saw awarded the Galactic Institute's prize for extreeme cleverness he got lynched by a rampaging mob of respectable physicists who had finally realized that the one thing they couldn't stand was a smartass."-THGTTG, D.Adams

dicktice · 2005-04-23 21:38:24

He was an inventor, of course. Nothing to do with scientific research, peer review, etc, etc. I'm an inventor, and only wish I could do science, but lack the brainpower. Your cavelier use of the term "science" betrays a similar lack which you obviously haven't come to terms with yet. Give it a few more years, and in the meantime by all means rant and rave against true science, but lay off us wanna-be scientists, who're heretics because we don't know no better, see?

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2005-04-22 08:47:31

Re: Interstellar colonization - Finally, a destination

#2 2005-04-22 09:24:49

Re: Interstellar colonization - Finally, a destination

#3 2005-04-22 11:27:14

Re: Interstellar colonization - Finally, a destination

#4 2005-04-22 11:40:25

Re: Interstellar colonization - Finally, a destination

#5 2005-04-22 12:58:57

Re: Interstellar colonization - Finally, a destination

#6 2005-04-22 16:33:04

Re: Interstellar colonization - Finally, a destination

#7 2005-04-22 21:46:45

Re: Interstellar colonization - Finally, a destination

#8 2005-04-23 01:29:16

Re: Interstellar colonization - Finally, a destination

#9 2005-04-23 07:44:56

Re: Interstellar colonization - Finally, a destination

#10 2005-04-23 11:37:10

Re: Interstellar colonization - Finally, a destination

#11 2005-04-23 21:38:24

Re: Interstellar colonization - Finally, a destination

Board footer