Space Colonization

Recommended Videos

RatRace123

Elite Member
Dec 1, 2009
6,649
0
41
In light of the success of Curiosity surviving its landing, I've gotten more interested in this topic again, and I'm hoping some people with more power and wealth than I have as well.

So, let's talk about space colonization. It's long since been a staple of science fiction but as the years go by, it seems like we humans could use it more and more. So, let's put on our hypothetical hats and do some thinkin' about this topic.

We need to get off Earth eventually, that's a given, but how quickly do you think we should start look towards colonizing other planets?

When do you think we will launch a colony on the moon or Mars?

What do you think would happen if we don't?

Do you think the lives of humanity as a whole would be improved with space colonization?


In answer to my own questions, I believe we should look towards getting off of Earth as quickly as possible. We have the technology to at least try building the foundations of a small colony on the moon. The cost would be massive, but the resources that are sure to be out there beyond Earth would make it worth it in the end. Beyond that, colonization of the moon, that would be a boon to culture. Every time humanity makes a great discovery we advance in more ways than one, and extraterrestrial colonization would probably lead to a new cultural renaissance.

Despite all that, I don't see us mobilizing for this goal any time soon.
My optimistic guess places us getting a moon colony by around 2040. As for Mars, I can't even begin to imagine that one.
Though if the Curiosity Rover discovers anything particularly interesting, who knows. Still probably won't be leaving Earth any time soon, but I'd like to think that I'll see us living on the moon in my lifetime.

In 2010 Steven Hawking has said that Humanity will probably face disaster if we don't leave the Earth within 200 years and I agree with him on that. It's not crazy to think that we might end up tearing ourselves and the planet apart within the next 200 years.
With more space to spread out and grow, we stand to alleviate that, at least for a while.

So, now you guys.
What say you about all this?

TL;DR: Look at the stuff that's bolded.
 

A Satanic Panda

New member
Nov 5, 2009
714
0
0
If our space program (US) had a fraction of the funding our defense budget has, we could put a man on Mars in no time. Hell the same contractors that build out tanks and jet fighters build our satellites and rovers.

A Lunar colony is not to far off either. With a study stream of supplies a Lunar colony right now is very doable. We've built the ISS and Mir, we can build structures like those again on the surface of the moon. A Lunar colony would be a great place to build and repair ships because it doesn't have an atmosphere. Also to mine Helium-3 for our fusion reactors.

We should start a permanent colony as soon as possible. At least when we get our economy back in order. We should prove we can maintain a colony close to home on our moon before jumping to Mars. As for when we might launch a permanent colony on the moon, I'd say relatively soon, 20 - 30 years.

If we don't colonize... Then we'll just stagnate on Earth until our sun dies? Or die off when C3 photosynthesis is no longer possible. (in about 600 million years)

Would our lives improve? At first probably not. Eventually the scientific progress we make will catch up to Earth, perhaps better solar panels, purer metals, and maybe an explosion of jobs for a gigantic space program.
 

yeti585

New member
Apr 1, 2012
380
0
0
I have a plan for colonization of another planet. That being said, it probably has a million pitfalls but I do not have a degree in any science so I would not know.
STEP 1, Pick a planet: The planet would need to be near enough to the earth's size so that there isn't to much or to little gravity. The planet doesn't necessarily need to have oxygen already there, but it not having gases that will kill humans would be nice. The planet also does not need to have water on it, just soil that could sustain plants and it would need to be able to do the water cycle.

Step 2, Map it: Now that we have a planet, we need to decide where we want to start. It would need to be an area in which storms (That of the destructive natural forces of Mars) would not hit. It would also need a valley to be turned into a body of water. But other than that valley it should be pretty flat to lower building costs.

Step 3, start circulation: The earth has many processes and cycles that make it habitable. We would have to kick-start these cycles on "planet X" if they are not already going. One of the most important to start would be the water cycle. If the planet does not have water, or does not have enough water, we would have to transport the water there. We can let the heat do the rest. After the water is there, we need oxygen. If the water has enough oxygen to support organisms they can be put there. But, we would also need to put aquatic plants to turn the produced carbon dioxide back to oxygen. If the water can't support oxygen breathing life, it would need to be able to support plant life, or organisms that undergo "chemosynthesis".

Step 4, first steps: Now we have a planet that has cycling water and air. We can finally go there. We would need to bring building supplies, to start our empire. We would also need to start putting resources onto the planet. We would need to plant trees, build solar power plants, etc.

Step 5, life is good: We now have colonized a planet... time to look for another planet to colonize.
 

Esotera

New member
May 5, 2011
3,396
0
0
Unless we can break the light barrier, then I don't see humanity colonising the rest of the universe. If things go well then the solar system should be no trouble, and possibly Alpha Centauri, but getting any further than that will just be massively inconvenient for organic life forms. There's a possibility that we could send any true AI out much further, and maybe help us with resources, but communication to back home is still an issue.
 

A Satanic Panda

New member
Nov 5, 2009
714
0
0
Esotera said:
Unless we can break the light barrier, then I don't see humanity colonising the rest of the universe. If things go well then the solar system should be no trouble, and possibly Alpha Centauri, but getting any further than that will just be massively inconvenient for organic life forms. There's a possibility that we could send any true AI out much further, and maybe help us with resources, but communication to back home is still an issue.
Well that's the thing about space travel. The closer you get to the speed of light, time slows down within the ship. So much in fact that a trip to Alpha Centauri would only take months if we could accelerate fast enough. So in the ship, the journey takes a few months, but to us earthlings it takes them about 4 years. So it would sort be like a one way ticket to spread the human race across the cosmos.

But I'm gunning for wormhole technology.
 

Heronblade

New member
Apr 12, 2011
1,202
0
0
yeti585 said:
I have a plan for colonization of another planet. That being said, it probably has a million pitfalls but I do not have a degree in any science so I would not know.
STEP 1, Pick a planet: The planet would need to be near enough to the earth's size so that there isn't to much or to little gravity. The planet doesn't necessarily need to have oxygen already there, but it not having gases that will kill humans would be nice. The planet also does not need to have water on it, just soil that could sustain plants and it would need to be able to do the water cycle.

Step 2, Map it: Now that we have a planet, we need to decide where we want to start. It would need to be an area in which storms (That of the destructive natural forces of Mars) would not hit. It would also need a valley to be turned into a body of water. But other than that valley it should be pretty flat to lower building costs.

Step 3, start circulation: The earth has many processes and cycles that make it habitable. We would have to kick-start these cycles on "planet X" if they are not already going. One of the most important to start would be the water cycle. If the planet does not have water, or does not have enough water, we would have to transport the water there. We can let the heat do the rest. After the water is there, we need oxygen. If the water has enough oxygen to support organisms they can be put there. But, we would also need to put aquatic plants to turn the produced carbon dioxide back to oxygen. If the water can't support oxygen breathing life, it would need to be able to support plant life, or organisms that undergo "chemosynthesis".

Step 4, first steps: Now we have a planet that has cycling water and air. We can finally go there. We would need to bring building supplies, to start our empire. We would also need to start putting resources onto the planet. We would need to plant trees, build solar power plants, etc.

Step 5, life is good: We now have colonized a planet... time to look for another planet to colonize.
Yeah, there are a few issues. Importing that much water alone would be a colossal task. For the same energy expenditure, we could probably build our own artificial habitat out in space large enough for all of humanity.

Unless we find a planet with another form of life already present, we cannot expect free oxygen, either in the water or in the atmosphere, O2 is simply too volatile to exist in an open system for very long. If CO2 is present in large quantities and we can import enough anaerobic organisms such as blue green algae, kickstarting the O2 cycle is certainly possible, but is likely to take several million years to finish if relying on photosynthesis alone.
 

Imthatguy

New member
Sep 11, 2009
587
0
0
Terraforming Mars or another planet isnt a good idea. We could build a thousand O'neill cylinders for a fraction of the price (in materials; money is pointless for a project on that scale) and live with gravity when we need it and in freefall to simplify relevant industrial processes.

FTL is impossible of course but we could 'cheat' with wormholes or spacetime distortion but those technologies are probably so far into the distant future (if not impossible) that humanity will have self-destructed by then so colonies free of earth orbit and self sufficient are a must.
 

FalloutJack

Bah weep grah nah neep ninny bom
Nov 20, 2008
15,485
0
0
{1} Hey, let's focus on LANDING somethng on a planet first, properly. THEN, we'll talk about colonizing. It is a LONG way off, unless you wanna start sending over pressure domes and lots of trees over to Mars RIGHT NOW.

{2} Take what I said about sending supplies and figure that at least we have more time to do it in, the moon being closer and all. I think we should set up something SMALL and permanent soon, and then build up to larger structures. By this time, the Mobile Suit will have been completed, and soon after we'll build space colonies and new materials forged in zero gravity environments... Mars? I already said.

{3} Breeding instinct isn't just in animals. Humans will eventually stop. It's just that with all our development, there is not one animal or form of life here we cannot conquer and use as a resource. Ergo, the limits have not been found yet.

{4} Look, I wanna go out there. Other people wanna go out there. SOMEONE will benefit if we do.
 

Rawne1980

New member
Jul 29, 2011
4,143
0
0
We won't be seeing anything like colonising another planet any time soon.

I doubt i'll be around to see it and I very much doubt my kids or their kids will either.
 

yeti585

New member
Apr 1, 2012
380
0
0
Heronblade said:
Yeah, there are a few issues. Importing that much water alone would be a colossal task. For the same energy expenditure, we could probably build our own artificial habitat out in space large enough for all of humanity.

Unless we find a planet with another form of life already present, we cannot expect free oxygen, either in the water or in the atmosphere, O2 is simply too volatile to exist in an open system for very long. If CO2 is present in large quantities and we can import enough anaerobic organisms such as blue green algae, kickstarting the O2 cycle is certainly possible, but is likely to take several million years to finish if relying on photosynthesis alone.
A man can dream. By artificial habitat, do you mean something along the lines of a giant spaceship, but orbiting the sun?
 

Heronblade

New member
Apr 12, 2011
1,202
0
0
yeti585 said:
Heronblade said:
Yeah, there are a few issues. Importing that much water alone would be a colossal task. For the same energy expenditure, we could probably build our own artificial habitat out in space large enough for all of humanity.

Unless we find a planet with another form of life already present, we cannot expect free oxygen, either in the water or in the atmosphere, O2 is simply too volatile to exist in an open system for very long. If CO2 is present in large quantities and we can import enough anaerobic organisms such as blue green algae, kickstarting the O2 cycle is certainly possible, but is likely to take several million years to finish if relying on photosynthesis alone.
A man can dream. By artificial habitat, do you mean something along the lines of a giant spaceship, but orbiting the sun?
There are a number of designs that might work. An ideal station would make full use of the abundant sunlight, both for energy and growing crops, and can be rotated to simulate gravity.

Thatguy mentioned O'niel cylinders. These would comprise of a set of counter-rotating tubes that alternate between land areas and "windows"
The presidium section of the citadel in Mass Effect would be an example of a Stanford torus, a slightly smaller design that could be efficiently created in large numbers.
If given the materials needed to go big, you could upgrade to a Bishop Ring, similar concept, but large enough to retain its own atmosphere without a "roof", while offering similar amounts of living space as some of the larger countries on Earth, like Australia, without the creepy highly toxic wildlife. (again, there's a video game equivalent, this time in Halo)
There is also the Dyson Ring concept, but that would be ridiculously out of reach if only working with resources found in this solar system, although it would be incredibly useful if accomplished, much less its much bigger brother the Dyson sphere. Both structures would actually encircle the sun.
 

CrimsonBlaze

New member
Aug 29, 2011
2,252
0
0
We need to get off Earth eventually, that's a given, but how quickly do you think we should start looking towards colonizing other planets?

When we can travel to other planets/satellites during our lifetime and travel back and forth within a few hours or days.

When do you think we will launch a colony on the moon or Mars?

Not sure about the moon. I would believe that if there were dangerous experiments, they would take place in a moon base, away from the Earth. As far as Mars is concerned, we will just have to wait for Curiosity and hope that it excites the people of Earth to get interested on the Red Rock again.

What do you think would happen if we don't?

I'm almost certain that someone at some point in the future will fund an expedition into space and the humans will touch down on both familiar and unfamiliar worlds. It's going to happen; the time for it to come to fruition will depend on how much interest and monetary investments are made towards it.

Do you think the lives of humanity as a whole would be improved with space colonization?

It will create great leaps in technology from all fields and thus, improve the human life in general. Again, space colonies might be at liberty to take riskier experiments, away from the risk of humans on Earth.
 

yeti585

New member
Apr 1, 2012
380
0
0
Heronblade said:
There are a number of designs that might work. An ideal station would make full use of the abundant sunlight, both for energy and growing crops, and can be rotated to simulate gravity.

Thatguy mentioned O'niel cylinders. These would comprise of a set of counter-rotating tubes that alternate between land areas and "windows"
The presidium section of the citadel in Mass Effect would be an example of a Stanford torus, a slightly smaller design that could be efficiently created in large numbers.
If given the materials needed to go big, you could upgrade to a Bishop Ring, similar concept, but large enough to retain its own atmosphere without a "roof", while offering similar amounts of living space as some of the larger countries on Earth, like Australia, without the creepy highly toxic wildlife. (again, there's a video game equivalent, this time in Halo)
There is also the Dyson Ring concept, but that would be ridiculously out of reach if only working with resources found in this solar system, although it would be incredibly useful if accomplished, much less its much bigger brother the Dyson sphere. Both structures would actually encircle the sun.
The problem with a ring encircling the sun would be that it'd be so massive that we would be scarce to find enough building materials to make it (It'd need to be made of the highest quality stuff. No one wants to hear the giant ring your living on has a crack in it.). Australia without creepy toxic wildlife you say? That just wont do. We will make space scorpions.
 
Mar 9, 2010
2,722
0
0
We need to sort our shit out here before we get into space colonization. Until Earth is united with no borders or nationalities we will only be spreading our wars to other planets. I don't want to see borders stretch to space, it'll just make everything far to complex. Hell trying to map that for schools would be a challenge.
 

Heronblade

New member
Apr 12, 2011
1,202
0
0
yeti585 said:
The problem with a ring encircling the sun would be that it'd be so massive that we would be scarce to find enough building materials to make it (It'd need to be made of the highest quality stuff. No one wants to hear the giant ring your living on has a crack in it.). Australia without creepy toxic wildlife you say? That just wont do. We will make space scorpions.
Yeah, I'm not a big fan of the Dyson ring/sphere personally, as neat as it would be to enclose that kind of volume, it just takes way too much in the way of resources. For building materials, Carbon nanotubes would be the most appropriate among the materials we know of, and there is plenty of Carbon to go around, but actually producing it is... difficult at the moment. The longest segments we have are currently measured in feet, and anything more than a few inches is rare.
 

Muspelheim

New member
Apr 7, 2011
2,021
0
0
The Unworthy Gentleman said:
We need to sort our shit out here before we get into space colonization. Until Earth is united with no borders or nationalities we will only be spreading our wars to other planets. I don't want to see borders stretch to space, it'll just make everything far to complex. Hell trying to map that for schools would be a challenge.
The problem is, if we won't consider space colonization before everything is sorted and peachy on earth, well... We'll never get out and at it.

Yes, things ought to be better than they are now, that's for sure. But although things look bleak, we're already waging much, much less wars than we used to. Things are getting better, and I'd think we ought to settle for "good enough" instead of "perfect" if we ever want to get started. Because things never will be perfect. We might as well try to get as close as we can, but we'll need the promise of future advances and actual examples of progress to keep our hopes up and the idea of a better future for everyone alive.
 
Mar 9, 2010
2,722
0
0
Muspelheim said:
The problem is, if we won't consider space colonization before everything is sorted and peachy on earth, well... We'll never get out and at it.
I want unity though. I don't want it to be another space race, it should be a communal effort to get there with the idea of betterment of humanity, not one country trying to get to plant their flag wherever there's ground to be colonized. Making progress to that stage would be great right now, but I'd rather we were all one group before we make the final push, even if that meant waiting another 500 years.
 

M-E-D The Poet

New member
Sep 12, 2011
575
0
0
RatRace123 said:
In light of the success of Curiosity surviving its landing, I've gotten more interested in this topic again, and I'm hoping some people with more power and wealth than I have as well.

So, let's talk about space colonization. It's long since been a staple of science fiction but as the years go by, it seems like we humans could use it more and more. So, let's put on our hypothetical hats and do some thinkin' about this topic.

We need to get off Earth eventually, that's a given, but how quickly do you think we should start look towards colonizing other planets?

When do you think we will launch a colony on the moon or Mars?

What do you think would happen if we don't?

Do you think the lives of humanity as a whole would be improved with space colonization?


In answer to my own questions, I believe we should look towards getting off of Earth as quickly as possible. We have the technology to at least try building the foundations of a small colony on the moon. The cost would be massive, but the resources that are sure to be out there beyond Earth would make it worth it in the end. Beyond that, colonization of the moon, that would be a boon to culture. Every time humanity makes a great discovery we advance in more ways than one, and extraterrestrial colonization would probably lead to a new cultural renaissance.

Despite all that, I don't see us mobilizing for this goal any time soon.
My optimistic guess places us getting a moon colony by around 2040. As for Mars, I can't even begin to imagine that one.
Though if the Curiosity Rover discovers anything particularly interesting, who knows. Still probably won't be leaving Earth any time soon, but I'd like to think that I'll see us living on the moon in my lifetime.

In 2010 Steven Hawking has said that Humanity will probably face disaster if we don't leave the Earth within 200 years and I agree with him on that. It's not crazy to think that we might end up tearing ourselves and the planet apart within the next 200 years.
With more space to spread out and grow, we stand to alleviate that, at least for a while.

So, now you guys.
What say you about all this?

TL;DR: Look at the stuff that's bolded.
Mars and the moon are mines, there will be no colonies there because they are not viable to sustain life.
Our researchers are currently only looking at planets that have the same ecosystem as earth that we could move to so that there has to be no terraforming.

Then accordingly only when the earth is inhabitable would we be able to mine the moon.

For these things to be a realistic possibility we need the ability to exit our solar system within a day.

Cole : That's going into our overtime baby !