Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Serious Conversation about the Future in Space

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 67 posts

Re: A Serious Conversation about the Future in Space

#41

Post by Numberwang »

Numberwang wrote: post #34
david-given wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

!Mars != !Space. Mars is a dusty, barren deathtrap of a rock that's at the bottom of a very deep hole. The only thing to do on Mars is to _be_ on Mars. It's not (plausibly) terraformable, sustaining life there will obvious continuous and hugely expensive technical input, there are no resources there worth going there for, and once you've gone there, to get back you have to climb out of a hugely deep hole. Meanwhile t…

"Did you know that there are parts of Venus which are a shirt-sleeve (and breathing mask) environment?" Please expand on this.

Found some info myself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Colonization_of_Venus

Re: A Serious Conversation about the Future in Space

#42

Post by dgregd »

ryandvm wrote: post #12

I'm incredibly optimistic about the disruption Elon Musk is bringing to the automotive and battery industries and the commercialization of space transport. Amazing guy. That said, I'm starting to think that Mars is going to be his Spruce Goose ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hughes_H-4_Hercules ). It's crazy, it's expensive, and at this point, it's an unnecessary moonshot that makes literal moonshots seem reasonable.…

> Mars is going to be his Spruce Goose

I'm a fan Elon Musk. But I think people are exaggerating that Mars mission. For me it looks like a goal for SpaceX employees. You have to somehow motivate people to work harder. Maybe I'm just a little cynical, but Elon is too smart to believe in this mission.

Re: A Serious Conversation about the Future in Space

#43

Post by adventured »

crusso wrote: post #27
ryandvm wrote: post #12

I'm incredibly optimistic about the disruption Elon Musk is bringing to the automotive and battery industries and the commercialization of space transport. Amazing guy. That said, I'm starting to think that Mars is going to be his Spruce Goose ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hughes_H-4_Hercules ). It's crazy, it's expensive, and at this point, it's an unnecessary moonshot that makes literal moonshots seem reasonable.…

I'm not sure humanity deserves to be the species that settles the Milky Way What does that even mean? Especially in the context of how much we've changed to get us this far and how much we would have to change to colonize a galaxy? You might as well have looked at Homo habilis 2.8M years ago and said, "these creatures don't deserve to surf the Internet."

It's premised on the belief that humans are unworthy. It's a meaningless statement, that only reveals what opinion the person holds of humanity, while lacking any objective foundation of comparison.

It's just as likely that we are the most worthy of any species in the Milky Way or universe. Which is to say, every other intelligent life form in the galaxy is worse, or perhaps drastically worse.

In my counter opinion, I regard the human race to be truly extraordinary and good overall. I'm aware of no finer species that should settle the Milky Way instead.

Re: A Serious Conversation about the Future in Space

#44

Post by stephengillie »

scottmwinters wrote: post #2

Was I the only one extremely disappointed that wasn't actually much related to Musk, nor a serious conversation about the future? It was an interview of a fiction novelist, nothing more.

This is a submarine piece for the upcoming movie.

Seeing this title on HN makes me sad. I don't care if that's the article's title - when a title says "A serious conversation about the Future in Space", I'm expecting a serious conversation, not an advertisement.

Re: A Serious Conversation about the Future in Space

#45

Post by AndrewKemendo »

benihana wrote: post #39
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Earth might get a flat tire There is no possible "flat-tire" existential risk scenario which makes moving to Mars cheaper (man hours) than just fixing whatever happened on earth. IMO that kills the whole thing right off the bat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc4HL_-VT2Y We (complex life) couldn't recover from something like that. Maybe simple life could hide deep in the earth and emerge when it's safe thousands of years later.

Makes my point. After that event you now have an earth that is about as habitable as Mars is today.

That is also the absolute worst case scenario that is theoretically possible, literally a one in a billion year event. That is something we can plan for and build for now with: Anti-Asteroid technology, "Fallout" shelters/biodomes etc... Or hell, a fucking Dyson sphere (or series of them) is a million times easier/better than trying to terraform Mars.

Oh and by the way, Mars has the same risks of Asteroids as earth does so we wouldn't be out of the woods just by being on Mars.

The reality is, people like space shit and want to go to space. There is just no good reason to do it as flesh and blood humans.

Re: A Serious Conversation about the Future in Space

#46

Post by pogden »

benihana wrote: post #39
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Earth might get a flat tire There is no possible "flat-tire" existential risk scenario which makes moving to Mars cheaper (man hours) than just fixing whatever happened on earth. IMO that kills the whole thing right off the bat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc4HL_-VT2Y We (complex life) couldn't recover from something like that. Maybe simple life could hide deep in the earth and emerge when it's safe thousands of years later.

True, but it takes a lot fewer resources to thoroughly catalog and monitor all large NEOs and divert the potentially hazardous ones. Estimates I've seen put 5km impacts at an average frequency of one every 10-100 million years range, and those are survivable. Larger impacts are even less frequent, but we can still likely divert them with existing technology.

Re: A Serious Conversation about the Future in Space

#47

Post by nine_k »

Numberwang wrote: post #34
david-given wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

!Mars != !Space. Mars is a dusty, barren deathtrap of a rock that's at the bottom of a very deep hole. The only thing to do on Mars is to _be_ on Mars. It's not (plausibly) terraformable, sustaining life there will obvious continuous and hugely expensive technical input, there are no resources there worth going there for, and once you've gone there, to get back you have to climb out of a hugely deep hole. Meanwhile t…

"Did you know that there are parts of Venus which are a shirt-sleeve (and breathing mask) environment?" Please expand on this.

Venus has a very thick atmosphere. At the height of a few miles above surface, there are layers with room temperature and human-acceptable pressure. Of course, the atmosphere is still CO₂ with some nasties, so a gas mask is required. But a Star-Wars-esque floating city would be quite manageable there. You can use hydrogen for floating because there's not oxygen around, so no risk of a blast.

NASA is already working on it: http://www.cnet.com/news/nasa-wants-to-build-a-floating-city...

Re: A Serious Conversation about the Future in Space

#48

Post by mixmastamyk »

david-given wrote: post #32
frank-weindel wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like someone has lost all hope for humanity and at that we should just accept our "inevitable" self-destruction. Even if the dream of colonizing mars is farfetched beyond fixing all of the problems we currently have on earth, it doesn't mean its not worth striving for. Goals like this drive people to do their best work and come up with creative solutions to problems that would otherwise never have been thought…

!Mars != !Space. Mars is a dusty, barren deathtrap of a rock that's at the bottom of a very deep hole. The only thing to do on Mars is to _be_ on Mars. It's not (plausibly) terraformable, sustaining life there will obvious continuous and hugely expensive technical input, there are no resources there worth going there for, and once you've gone there, to get back you have to climb out of a hugely deep hole. Meanwhile t…

Living on Venus won't save you from a future red-giant-phase Sol. Mars may not either, but it's a better bet.

Re: A Serious Conversation about the Future in Space

#49

Post by mixmastamyk »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #37
ryandvm wrote: post #12

I'm incredibly optimistic about the disruption Elon Musk is bringing to the automotive and battery industries and the commercialization of space transport. Amazing guy. That said, I'm starting to think that Mars is going to be his Spruce Goose ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hughes_H-4_Hercules ). It's crazy, it's expensive, and at this point, it's an unnecessary moonshot that makes literal moonshots seem reasonable.…

>Earth might get a flat tire There is no possible "flat-tire" existential risk scenario which makes moving to Mars cheaper (man hours) than just fixing whatever happened on earth. IMO that kills the whole thing right off the bat.

A red-giant Sol might be.

Re: A Serious Conversation about the Future in Space

#50

Post by npizzolato »

ryandvm wrote: post #12

I'm incredibly optimistic about the disruption Elon Musk is bringing to the automotive and battery industries and the commercialization of space transport. Amazing guy. That said, I'm starting to think that Mars is going to be his Spruce Goose ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hughes_H-4_Hercules ). It's crazy, it's expensive, and at this point, it's an unnecessary moonshot that makes literal moonshots seem reasonable.…

What I find amusing is that there are a whole ton of disaster scenarios for Earth that still leave Earth in a more hospitable condition than Mars.
Post reply on HN