FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Space Travel...






Would you attempt to start mankind on a new planet?
Yes
62%
 62%  [ 20 ]
No
9%
 9%  [ 3 ]
Not worth it, Won't happen in my lifetime
28%
 28%  [ 9 ]
Total Votes : 32

TruPain
I have constantly thought of space travel being a reality, but have never really put much thought into everything required to do so. But just my random thoughts have come up with this information:

-Perpetual Motion. How fast could a spacecraft actually travel using the laws of perpetual motion? Could one actually achive the speed of light this way? (I'm not even fully sure on all the technical information on perpetual motion, just the basics behind it)

-Build a Spacecraft in space, rather than a land based one. This would save on the fuel needed to take off, but would also reuire quite a bit of fuel for the numerous trips to space to take the materials up there.

-Build it Big. Build a big spacecraft that would allow 2-3 thousand people to inhabit the spacecraft. This would allow many generations of people to last for how ever many years or lifetimes it would take.

-Send a selective crew. Make sure to send doctors, teachers, agriculturalists, computer specialists, communications specialists, physisists, etc, so that you would have people aboard the ship that would have all the knowledge needed to start life on a distant planet provided you ever reached a habital planet.

-Make sure that the spacecraft had enough materials on board that would allow them to grow their own food and be able to replant seeds to create more food.


Yes, I do know this all seems far fetched, but the whole thought behind space travel totally amazes me. If someone came up to me and asked if I could say good bye to this planet for the rest of my life, take my family and attempt to travel to a distant planet and attempt to start a new life in a new planet, I would jump all over the idea. Of course, if my faily did not want to travel with me, it, would make the decision much more difficult, but overall, I think that it would be a great step forward for mankind, and I think I would want to be part of it. Even if I stood that chance that nothing would ever be found, I think, I would be willing to give it a try.

So what are your thoughts on space travel? And do you think that you would be willing to give up everything you have here, to "attempt" to create and start life on a new planet?
TruPain
OK, I hate bumping my own posts, but come on people... Does no one have any insight on space travel?

2 votes, and no replies... seems like a wasted topic in my opinion...

One of you must have something to say about this, wether it be a positive or negative, but most of all, people all think differently. Is something like this a reality or just science fiction?

I personally think this will happen, maybe not in my lifetime, but it will happen eventually... I would love for it to happen in my time, but come on... no one has any insight here? almost a 24 hour topic, and nothing here... wtf?


I dont think this is something to just ignore, I am looking for some thoughts here...

Even if you had to give up your life to start life on a new planet, would you?
_AVG_
I think the idea of starting life in another planet would be quite farfetched.

In say, 1500 years or so, if we can survive the current happenings around the globe, if we can find solutions to arising environmental problems, we won't need to be on another planet. In 1500 years, probably if we can somehow master forces which are galactic, we may be able to do things which seem impossible now.
GSIS
Until we figure out how to take care of this planet properly I would not support any attempt to populate another one.
tempdbs
Hopefully worst thought and trying to end their life without any meaning - if started this by a Normal humanbeing.

As there is no limit for his thoughts......... Crying or Very sad
Seiorai
GSIS wrote:
Until we figure out how to take care of this planet properly I would not support any attempt to populate another one.


Actually I agree, but let's face it. People will always look for new "toys" rather than at their own courtyard >.>

But I don't think it it'll take us 1500 years, like _AVG_ said. At this rate of expansion and evolution we'll attempt and be able to build such space crafts in less than 200 years....my opinion. Just think:
If in the last 50-60 years we've gone from horse post to Instant Messengers, don't want to think what we will invent in 100 or 200 years...o.o
Of course, if we don't auto-destruct meanwhile Razz

As a second argument, at the current population growth rate, we will NEED to leave elsewhere in a couple hundred years XD
{name here}
Not yet. Just, not yet. We couldn't terraform our neighbors without a global initiative, and good luck trying to find people that actually understand that it would be pointless to keep those insignificant lines that separate us. In addition the the problems we have with international bickering that would stop us from advancing, we would also have the problems of how we could actually do this quickly. It already takes months to go to Mars and Venus. Since both issues they have with hostile atmosphere have to be taken care of together easier than apart, it is more logical to do so. Unfortunately, any way we could do now would have a time constraint that we might not be able to handle, but if we could handle, both planets could have the starts of terraforming into Earth like planets, though every time we want to do someting to the planet, it could be too late. We probably would never be able to do so without closer to light travel, and I do not think we will invent such technology any time soon, but as soon as we do, we could start everything from helium mining operations in the Jovian system to Neptune. I wouldn't like to see the human race do that without true international collaboration and cooperation - without borders.

Quote:
If in the last 50-60 years we've gone from horse post to Instant Messengers, don't want to think what we will invent in 100 or 200 years...o.o
Of course, if we don't auto-destruct meanwhile

Try about 80-100 years. In 1947 automobiles were popular at least in the US. In 1957 they were definately in a full swing.
DoctorBeaver
We wouldn't need to terraform the entire planet at the outset. All that would be required is an eco-dome system to house the pioneers & grow their food. From that point, more eco-domes could be added as & when required to house new colonists.

Mars is the best bet for a first colony and there's enough water locked up in the polar caps to supply a substantial population.

I don't think any technology would be required for a Mars colony that we don't already have. We've got everything we need to build spaceships large enough and they could be built at & launched from the International Space Station to save on take-off fuel payload. Eco-domes already exist (the Eden project is a good example) and there's nothing magical about transporting water over a few hundred miles. For power, there's always geothermal.

But, as has been mentioned, it would take an effort of international will for such a project to get off the ground (no pun intended); or a country such as the USA, Russia or China would simply set up a colony of their own nationals and claim Martian territory for themselves.

Personally, I think it's a dead certainty that there will be a viable, self-sufficient colony of some sort on Mars well before the end of this century. There may even be a staging post on the moon (which would take more effort as water does not exist naturally on the moon).
The_Gamer294
But even with the water on mars in the polar caps, we'd need some way to create an atmosphere.
1. So we can breathe.
2. So the water will recycle itself.
3. So we don't get crushed, burned or mutated from meteors or the sun.
medievalman26
Yeah I really don't think that we should have another planet. Seriously we really screwed this one up pretty bad if you ask me(which you kind of did). It would be nice to have a new one but we would mess it up within a year(earth year).
medievalman26
Yeah I really don't think that we should have another planet. Seriously we really screwed this one up pretty bad if you ask me(which you kind of did). It would be nice to have a new one but we would mess it up within a year(earth year).
justnewbie
DoctorBeaver wrote:
We wouldn't need to terraform the entire planet at the outset. All that would be required is an eco-dome system to house the pioneers & grow their food. From that point, more eco-domes could be added as & when required to house new colonists.

Mars is the best bet for a first colony and there's enough water locked up in the polar caps to supply a substantial population.

I don't think any technology would be required for a Mars colony that we don't already have. We've got everything we need to build spaceships large enough and they could be built at & launched from the International Space Station to save on take-off fuel payload. Eco-domes already exist (the Eden project is a good example) and there's nothing magical about transporting water over a few hundred miles. For power, there's always geothermal.

But, as has been mentioned, it would take an effort of international will for such a project to get off the ground (no pun intended); or a country such as the USA, Russia or China would simply set up a colony of their own nationals and claim Martian territory for themselves.

Personally, I think it's a dead certainty that there will be a viable, self-sufficient colony of some sort on Mars well before the end of this century. There may even be a staging post on the moon (which would take more effort as water does not exist naturally on the moon).


Good idea it was to create a ecodome on Mars- but have you thought that the Eden project is not a fully closed dome as it supposed to be? Previous fully closed ecodomes proved that oxygen level inside the dome will decrease over time. And second, how about the radiation? And meteor strikes? That's a huge problem to be solved-

Honestly, it is still possible; and again it's the financial case that postpones the space colonization.. it's a big risk to big taken all this while.. so we've to wait space vacation to blossom.. hopefully increasing demand for space colonization..
virre
of 'course it's possible.

The bigest and most difficult step really is massive leaving of earth.

some siencetists have argued that Space Elevators acctualy might be doable.

If they are it is said that most of the other problems might be adjusted.

---

Of 'course we should learn how to handle earth first, but is that realistic.

That people how have issues with how bad we treat earth, would be essential, for just that reason.
skygaia
When I was young, space travel was possible in my imagination and Science fictions...
But I was told recently that one company has a plan to bulid space hotel.... the company has very detailed plan and been seeking partners...
GSIS
Seiorai wrote:
GSIS wrote:
Until we figure out how to take care of this planet properly I would not support any attempt to populate another one.


Actually I agree, but let's face it. People will always look for new "toys" rather than at their own courtyard >.>

But I don't think it it'll take us 1500 years, like _AVG_ said. At this rate of expansion and evolution we'll attempt and be able to build such space crafts in less than 200 years....my opinion. Just think:
If in the last 50-60 years we've gone from horse post to Instant Messengers, don't want to think what we will invent in 100 or 200 years...o.o
Of course, if we don't auto-destruct meanwhile Razz

As a second argument, at the current population growth rate, we will NEED to leave elsewhere in a couple hundred years XD


I think the problem is exactly one of population control.

The fundamental problem on Earth is excessive population. Humans don't have the right mindset, yet, to get that properly under control. It's coming - along with unprecedented changes to human rights, laws, and massive civil unrest - on a world-wide scale - as 'ecos' struggle against those who do not accept the necessity for change. Should we deny individuals the right to reproduce? Is it better to deny some the right to reproduce so that future generations of other peoples' descendants can survive on a healthier Earth? How could we select who might have that right - and who might not?

I believe the first attempts at colonising another world will involve fleets of gigantic space craft. We simply won't have solved the problems of near- or faster-than- light-speed travel in time for these first attempts so these colonists will travel for generations until they reach something capable of being colonised. The fundamental problem on those craft will be that of providing food for the population which - if we haven't developed the right mindset wrt population control - will be overtaken by the basic and fundamental human nature to reproduce. Those denied permission to do so are extremely likely to revolt against the leadership, putting the entire mission at almost certain risk of failure before it even reaches anywhere capable of supporting whatever is left.

Without the right mindset, those who leave in the first wave will be doing so out of desperation.

It is quite possible that the first to depart, using slow technology, will be overtaken by later colonists, using faster technology, before they arrive anywhere habitable!
Donutey
Or you could just send the DNA of people, with robotic caretakers (which would be the difficult part), much less expensive craft, much lower chance of human death (during the journey at least).
_AVG_
What if we create an artificial planet of our own ... something like a satellite?
carlokes
Hi there,

I don't know if i would have the guts to leave everything behind and go to other planet when I don't even know 1/4 of this one.
But one thing I know, I would love to try living in Zero Gravity, I really hope that one day i am able to experience, even if only for some minutes, what zero gravity really is.

Stay Cool.
justnewbie
_AVG_ wrote:
What if we create an artificial planet of our own ... something like a satellite?


Good idea, but practically impossible for now. It's much harder to create an artificial planet than colonising a small asteroid, cause an artificial planet needs air, water and soil- and the transportation costs would be enough to suck wealth of multiple Bill Gates. Maybe it's better to build a supertall tower- extruding to the space.. like the idea of space elevator- that would make spaceship construction cheaper i guess.
exarkun
Seiorai wrote:
GSIS wrote:
Until we figure out how to take care of this planet properly I would not support any attempt to populate another one.


Actually I agree, but let's face it. People will always look for new "toys" rather than at their own courtyard >.>

... Just think:
If in the last 50-60 years we've gone from horse post to Instant Messengers, don't want to think what we will invent in 100 or 200 years...o.o
Of course, if we don't auto-destruct meanwhile Razz

...


Can't agree more on the "auto-destruct" part more. We moved from one tech to another, and are abandoning our old technologies on the way. Like in the past we used to mail by envelope, but with the increase in email, i can rarely see anyone mailing by hand nowadays. Same thing, if we inhabitate on another planet, we would sooner or later forgot about our mother earth.
nilsmo
It has been many years since we've had a manned mission to the moon. It simply is too expensive and has no benefits, though it can be done. Setting up a base with supplies on the moon is definitely not in the near future because of huge cost and just about zero benefit. Imagine shipping everything back and forth, wasting a loooot of fuel, etc. It would be several, several, several times more expensive than a manned mission to the moon. And a manned mission to the moon is several, several, several times more expensive than getting a man in space and even that is very expensive. Still, putting a huge slice of the US's resources in this, a base on the man is actually possible I think. But that would never happen, and costs won't go down much in the next 50 years, as the have not gone down exponentially in the last 50. Setting up a base on the moon won't happen.

To have a man on another planet is much more extreme than the base on the moon. Mars is the only place that would be an option (spacecraft melt within hours of reaching Venus, the other neighbor of the Earth, because of extraordinary pressure and temperature - hundreds of degrees). But Mars is far, far away. Thousands of times farther than the Moon at least. There would, again, be little benefit sending someone there compared to the extreme costs. Technology is not up to the challenge of this. Only very lightweight crafts can be sent to Mars that go slowly. Sustaining humans along a long journey (months) with fuel and food and air is simply impossible right now. All these will add further weight to the aircraft making the fuel cost impossible to manage. Also sustained amounts of time in deep space carry many other risks which will add more money and make it even more impossible. Look at reality please. And it will also be impossible for decades at least. Probably hundreds of years until that is a possibility.

Considering that, a base on Mars within a hundred years is simply impossible. You can go a couple hundred thousand miles to the moon but not a couple MILLION miles to Mars.
adrenaline_rush
I'm really interested in this new mission to mars. The thing I want to know most of all when they get there would be what did they find. Im not sure what they've found so far but if they can actually get on the surface of mars im sure they would find something farely interesting! Of course in my lifetime i dont foresee anything really major happening but the thought of "what's really out there" in the giant universe is always exciting for me.
Fariza
i say not in this generation but think about it, think about how much the world has developed recently! its just mad! dont you think it can develop even more?? there will be more astonishing inventions and creations. MARK MY WORDS Razz
Lennon
As a scientist I have a few things to point out.

First is the soil of the Martian surface actually contains toxic levels of organic chemicals. Any type of plant or bacteria wouldn't survive the acidity and toxicity of the soil. Plants would have to be grown in pots of limited soil, which over time would become infertile soil.

The second problem is with space travel through zero gravity. It would take approximately one year to travel to Mars given our current technology (given NASA plan on the year 2020). After one year the body adapts to zero gravity. Bone density becomes less important for the body and the body will reduce muscle mass for the likes of legs and limbs that are used much less frequently. That's fine when the body adapts to zero gravity, but when you come to land on the Martian surface the body will not be able to cope with the new force of gravity, again different to space and earth (bodies weigh less than half they would on earth).

And the third problem is a closed ecosystem. Given the only real input of energy is solar energy and Martian wind, the ecosystem would have to depend on a much reduced supply of natural energy. Fair enough, you could have a cycle of photosynthesis by plants to produce oxygen, and bacteria to break down the dead matter and reintroduce new nutrients. Given the second law of thermodynamics (entropy) there is very little chance of a closed ecosystem surviving because there has to be a net loss of entropy over time. And I don't think the input of solar and wind energy will sustain that cycle inside the system. That's the physical side of the enclosed system. The other difficulty is the psychological effects of being isolated with just a few other human beings for long-term durations. You need people who are very interactive and psychologically healthy to deal with this pressure. And given how the Earth seasonally orbits at a large distance from Mars, communication between the two planets depends on how close the two are in orbit around the sun, depending on the season and trajectory. we can already see how people survive in Antarctica over the Winter season with just a few limited members and they deal with it over 6 months of darkness and limited contact. But over years this becomes more lonely and difficult, especially for the first members of the new society who will have to deal with home-sickness and memories of life on Earth. For there is very likely no going back.

For surfaces outside Mars to be inhabitable we will need generations of techonoly advancement to even consider landing. The moon is much more considerable given the mineral resources and nearness to earth (given the system can survive the extreme temperatures). Plus the moon is so close to the earth that frequent travel between the two is easily possible, and resources shared frequently between the two, so isolation is not as important.
nilsmo
Lennon wrote:
Any type of plant or bacteria wouldn't survive the acidity and toxicity of the soil.

Yes, of course. Plants on Mars is impossible unless you take a "portable planet Earth" there.

Lennon wrote:
Bone density becomes less important for the body and the body will reduce muscle mass

This bad effect of zero gravity may be mitigated by a lot of exercise. Not very fun for the astronauts though.

Lennon wrote:
Given the second law of thermodynamics (entropy) there is very little chance of a closed ecosystem surviving because there has to be a net loss of entropy over time. And I don't think the input of solar and wind energy will sustain that cycle inside the system.


I think the solar energy could sustain the system and prevent randomness. Why wouldn't it be able to? Please explain further.
Kestrad
I think that establishing humankind on another planet (assuming that all technicalities have been taken care of) would be an interesting prospect, as long as it is unnecessary to disturb any other beings living there. Which raises the question, is it moral to affect the evolution of life on other planets?
frozenhead
Space Travel is a awesome thing but implementing the researches that are posted are too way much expensive that it can take national budgets of several first world countries. I think before making researches, one may think an idea to cut off budgets to proceed. It's good having this wacky ideas about the universe but it's really be stuck an idea forever if budgets are not feasible in the first place.
GSIS
Kestrad wrote:
is it moral to affect the evolution of life on other planets?


The Prime Directive?

I suspect we'll try to assess whether that life is sentient. If we think it is we'll be expected (under our own laws yet to be defined and written) to leave it alone unless it already has an accurate awareness of life alien to its own planet. In practice there'll be law-breakers who simply invade the territory anyway.

In addition, in the long term, we'll discover that our view of sentience is not the only possible one by which time we'll have interfered with the development of many sentient beings without realising the harm we've caused until it's too late.

As with the European invasion of North America there will be many diverse opinions about whether or not any harm was caused at all.
unknownc1c
space travel will be easier in the years to come i'm sure of it. We're advancing very fast, in my opinion it's only a matter of time before we find some new material on some foriegn planet and discover how to travel long distances very fast using hardly any fuel.

Also to anyone who said it won't happen in their lifetime, i think you'd have to be at least 40 to believe that. Already we have the technology to build a elevator to space, now does anyone want to give the money to do that? no, not really, not until some details are more clear. We might even have the technology to trave through space and populate other worlds right now, it just requires money. If we ever do away with the need for money and work to benefit ourselves then we'll have a MASSIVE leap in everything.

oh and i agree with nilsmo, except you can create gravity by spinning objects around. If it came down to almost no muscle i'm sure people would spend daily trips to something that could keep you from losing muscle.
eday2010
Living on another planet would give us another place to fight each other. Laughing

I don't think humans living on another planet longterm will ever happen. Sure, there will be stations on the moon and Mars where astronauts will stay for a short period of time, but I don't think we'll ever populate another planet. There are none suitable anywhere near us. We'd have to travel millions of light years to get to that planet they recently discovered that is very earth-like. And even then, it might not be suitable for us.

Besides, we'll all be dead soon from melting and drowning if you listen to the junk science and the global warming fear mongering. Laughing
vln004
dude, star trek.
GSIS
vln004 wrote:
dude, star trek.


Precisely.

An interesting feature of science fiction is that it provides us with many possible futures. Some writing will turn out to have been remarkably accurate predictions. The Star Trek phenomenon is also an indicator of human aspirations. The main reason that it is so popular is that so many of us, given the opportunity, would want to be on the crew of a real Enterprise.

Star Trek 2nd Generation (not the Captain Kirk shoot-first-ask-questions-later years) provides an excellent model for the progress of humanity into space from moral, ethical, legal, human will, and technological perspectives.

As the technology of Star Trek is based on strong, well-researched scientific principles it is inevitable that much of that technology will become reality for future generations. However, it will take a long time for the technologists to catch up sufficiently with the forward thinkers to allow manned exploration even just within our own solar system.

The other requirements are part of human nature which will lead us to develop the technology simply so that we can begin exploring space. The will to do so already exists. It has existed since humans first wondered what was on the other side of 'that hill', or 'that ocean'. The social structures will be developed in time.

The earliest space exploration has already been done using unmanned craft and robots. We won't be happy to leave it at that. We have a fundamental need to be there in person that no robot can ever fully satisfy. We need to see through our own eyes - not someone or something else's!

We're part of the process right now - in this discussion. Many people all over the world - mainly those who are not living from hand to mouth and fighting for basic survival - are considering what the requirements would be. Some discussions are light-hearted and at a layman level. Others are very serious indeed and will be used to assemble the understanding and framework that will support the development of suitable technologies and social structures for a manned trip within the solar system and, eventually, much further.

It's far from a done deal - but there will be manned trips beyond the solar system. Once someone has identified a place that might be made habitable someone will want to visit. Once someone has visited someone will want to live there temporarily. Once someone has lived there temporarily someone will want, or be forced by circumstance, to live there permanently. You can't get away from human nature!
j_f_k
ITs such a shame that as little as 40 years ago lots of people such as Artur C Clarke predicted that by now we'd be colonising the moon - and its ironic that the vast majority of hte progress we have made in space travel has been driven by comptetition with the Russians but not any real need.

Not to be confused with unmanned space flight, which is, of course really useful, especially if you're a Simpsons fan... or like to make long, overseas calls.

Yes there is no doubt that it has enhancened our understanding of the universe and maybe one day, we won't be so heavily taxed, overburdned with ageing poor etc that we will have enough energy to do this for the reaon that it can be done (like climbing everest) - er he make a breakthrough that makes the lauching process quicker and easier.

I remember the story of Jacob's ladder from a book (again by Clarke). That

The ISS is unfortunately not a good start simply because its problems, politics and budget overruns. Although the concept was a good one and a right-sized step in the right direction, the disastrous finances of the project will put off other governemnts for years to come.
LeatherRose
Yes i think we deffinatly should start mankind on a new planet. Earth is getting far to crowded and all the waste that humans produce would drop if we send some people to another planet..
however then that planet would soon become a waste land...
hmm..
i don't know anymore
Jaan
Yeah man totally, F**k the haters!
Related topics
Is the moon made out of cheese?
How to become a millionaire on the internet?
Anyone like "Dune"
Aye, Scotty!!
Facts about India : Proud to be an Indian
Aliens - Myth or reality?
Beam weapons, a new way of warfare?
Space, Time, and all that mumbo jumbo
Life on Mars
Private Space Flight
Air breathing rockets
Quantum Star- The FREE online space strategy game
Radiation Ring Round Earth Stopping Space Travel
Intergalactic space travel
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> General -> General Chat

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.