Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 54

Thread: Will science survive human nature.

  1. Top | #21
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    28,497
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    125,249
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    Still. Will it support lifting or transporting 100 to 5000 individuals and necessary supplies hither and fro. Not damn likely. BTW bilby did the bos 'splaing it was a booster system. It's still SF stuff as far as an getting from here to another place where intelligent life exists which is still in woo woo neighborhood.

    Park it next to the spot for Dean drive.
    No, it's not a woo drive. The physics is sound and holds up in the real world. It's slow but it can take us to the stars.

  2. Top | #22
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    23,012
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    33,489
    Rep Power
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    Still. Will it support lifting or transporting 100 to 5000 individuals and necessary supplies hither and fro. Not damn likely. BTW bilby did the bos 'splaing it was a booster system. It's still SF stuff as far as an getting from here to another place where intelligent life exists which is still in woo woo neighborhood.

    Park it next to the spot for Dean drive.
    No, it's not a woo drive. The physics is sound and holds up in the real world. It's slow but it can take us to the stars.
    And of course it only needs a fairly small probability of being implemented. If there's a 1% chance we will ever bother to do it, then you only need 69 similar civilisations in the entire galaxy for it to be more likely than not that one will eventually come and visit us.

  3. Top | #23
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    28,497
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    125,249
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    Still. Will it support lifting or transporting 100 to 5000 individuals and necessary supplies hither and fro. Not damn likely. BTW bilby did the bos 'splaing it was a booster system. It's still SF stuff as far as an getting from here to another place where intelligent life exists which is still in woo woo neighborhood.

    Park it next to the spot for Dean drive.
    No, it's not a woo drive. The physics is sound and holds up in the real world. It's slow but it can take us to the stars.
    And of course it only needs a fairly small probability of being implemented. If there's a 1% chance we will ever bother to do it, then you only need 69 similar civilisations in the entire galaxy for it to be more likely than not that one will eventually come and visit us.
    I suspect at least most species would avoid colonizing potentially life-bearing systems. We would still detect them around nearby stars, though.

  4. Top | #24
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    23,012
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    33,489
    Rep Power
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post

    And of course it only needs a fairly small probability of being implemented. If there's a 1% chance we will ever bother to do it, then you only need 69 similar civilisations in the entire galaxy for it to be more likely than not that one will eventually come and visit us.
    I suspect at least most species would avoid colonizing potentially life-bearing systems. We would still detect them around nearby stars, though.
    I suspect the reverse. Surely humans would specifically target systems likely to be at least suitable for life, if not known to actually host it. Why would most aliens not be expected to do the same?

  5. Top | #25
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    13,168
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    31,381
    Rep Power
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    Still. Will it support lifting or transporting 100 to 5000 individuals and necessary supplies hither and fro. Not damn likely. BTW bilby did the bos 'splaing it was a booster system. It's still SF stuff as far as an getting from here to another place where intelligent life exists which is still in woo woo neighborhood.

    Park it next to the spot for Dean drive.
    No, it's not a woo drive. The physics is sound and holds up in the real world. It's slow but it can take us to the stars.
    And of course it only needs a fairly small probability of being implemented. If there's a 1% chance we will ever bother to do it, then you only need 69 similar civilisations in the entire galaxy for it to be more likely than not that one will eventually come and visit us.
    Yeah. The problem with 69 civilizations is not that they are similar but that they exist in proximite time. It's amazing how many evolutions can be squeezed into 13.8 billion years across a universe of ten to the whatever stars that is over 90 billion light years in extent and still never have two that meet time nor distance constraints.

  6. Top | #26
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    28,497
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    125,249
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post

    And of course it only needs a fairly small probability of being implemented. If there's a 1% chance we will ever bother to do it, then you only need 69 similar civilisations in the entire galaxy for it to be more likely than not that one will eventually come and visit us.
    I suspect at least most species would avoid colonizing potentially life-bearing systems. We would still detect them around nearby stars, though.
    I suspect the reverse. Surely humans would specifically target systems likely to be at least suitable for life, if not known to actually host it. Why would most aliens not be expected to do the same?
    Unless there's some major loophole in interstellar travel anyone who can do it is quite capable of colonizing a system lacking in habitable worlds. The systems that might harbor life would likely be treated as we treat nature reserves.

  7. Top | #27
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    28,497
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    125,249
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post

    And of course it only needs a fairly small probability of being implemented. If there's a 1% chance we will ever bother to do it, then you only need 69 similar civilisations in the entire galaxy for it to be more likely than not that one will eventually come and visit us.
    Yeah. The problem with 69 civilizations is not that they are similar but that they exist in proximite time. It's amazing how many evolutions can be squeezed into 13.8 billion years across a universe of ten to the whatever stars that is over 90 billion light years in extent and still never have two that meet time nor distance constraints.
    You're missing the point.

    Time? Once a civilization spreads to the stars it will be incredibly hard to destroy other than through some cataclysmic war. A 99% kill wouldn't change the outcome much.

    Distance? That's the point of our discussion of colonization. Slowboats can colonize the entire galaxy in tens of megayears. (Figure a slowboat goes 1% of lightspeed and will only be launched from a colony at least 1,000 years old and you get something in the 20-30 million year timeframe. Note that the spiral "arms" are not a limiting factor--the stars are nearly as dense between the arms as in them. The "arms" are regions of recent star formation with big, bright stars. Those have died in the areas between the arms.)

    Thus if any civilization within our galaxy reached the point of interstellar colonization we almost certainly should have already detected them. Something makes the odds of a planet producing an interstellar civilization at least in the tens of billions to one range--but all the factors we can assign approximate values to are hopelessly inadequate to explain this. Thus it must be one of the factors we can't put numbers to.

  8. Top | #28
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    13,168
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    31,381
    Rep Power
    59
    I'm not talking about colonization. I'm talking about making contact with another lifeform as the equation is designed to answer.

    But, since you are talking about colonization my point against that is too many people need be transported for slow systems to be workable. I'm pretty sure that over the course of about 100*10 years to get to a system only 10 light years away that the population of the ship will suffer what happened to those who migrated from Australia to Tasmania. That population was too small to sustain culture and they lost the capability to control fire among may other losses.

    So the ships will have to have redundant life sustaining production capacities which don't exist. They will have to hibernate which isn't really going to do much good since acquiring such a capability probably changes us in other ways making travelers other than human. My estimate that to sustain significant culture perhaps 10 thousand persons will have to travel most reproducing and wakeful with perhaps a few geared to hibernate. There4 are all sorts of problem with size and texture of colonists beyond just losing culture and tribal history. Our friends the frogs seem to be in the process of dying out because the atmosphere is permitting more radiation to reach down to sea level for instance.

    Likelihood of catastrophe isn't just from meteors and such. There lurk stars nearby that are ready to go supernova of sufficient size to produce energy jets of several dozen light years which may spew in many directions if the thing is set into some sort of gyration. In fact my guess the likelihood of extinction events will exceed what we face on earth as a probability. Hell there's already one hole in the milky way. who's to say another might be formed in human existence span.

    And as you note without even considering things we don''t really understand we can conclude there are no cultures even taking into acount only what we do understand.

    Put out that cigar and park your idea next to the Deandrive. You're likely to hurt someone.

  9. Top | #29
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    28,497
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    125,249
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by fromderinside View Post
    I'm not talking about colonization. I'm talking about making contact with another lifeform as the equation is designed to answer.
    You miss the point. I am talking about colonization because once that happens we aren't dealing with one inhabited system but a vast number of them.

    But, since you are talking about colonization my point against that is too many people need be transported for slow systems to be workable. I'm pretty sure that over the course of about 100*10 years to get to a system only 10 light years away that the population of the ship will suffer what happened to those who migrated from Australia to Tasmania. That population was too small to sustain culture and they lost the capability to control fire among may other losses.
    Assuming they handle it correctly they would bring a viable population along.

    So the ships will have to have redundant life sustaining production capacities which don't exist. They will have to hibernate which isn't really going to do much good since acquiring such a capability probably changes us in other ways making travelers other than human. My estimate that to sustain significant culture perhaps 10 thousand persons will have to travel most reproducing and wakeful with perhaps a few geared to hibernate. There4 are all sorts of problem with size and texture of colonists beyond just losing culture and tribal history. Our friends the frogs seem to be in the process of dying out because the atmosphere is permitting more radiation to reach down to sea level for instance.
    We have no indication that hibernation is possible and the slowboat model doesn't assume it.

  10. Top | #30
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    13,168
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    31,381
    Rep Power
    59
    OK. This is going nowhere. The reason I mentioned Tasmania was to suggest humans don't know what they need to colonize. Look at what the Europeans did to American natives when they came if you need to understand Rumsfeld basics and this isn't even unknown unknowns.

    The right place for your pet rock is next to Dean Drive.

    We won't even send people. More likely, robots. That's what we'll do when we mine meteors. Nothing like the cute science-fiction I read in the late forties and the fifties.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •