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

Our Fate Is in the Stars

theamericanscholar.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 37 posts

Re: Our Fate Is in the Stars

#11

Post by idlewords »

tomp wrote: post #6
coldtea wrote: post #4

There's no "fate" and no contract we've signed that guaranteers we're an interplanetary species. It's just that we wish we could be in the stars, but wishing doesn't always make it so. And in some cases, wishing never makes it so. Especially without installed bases, big haul ability, etc, it takes trillions and has zero to no returns (except the glory, curiosity, and scientific value) for companies to go to the plane…

Wishes make profit. What is the use of an iPhone beyond satisfying people's wishes? Yet Apple is a $1bn company.

And yet the iPhone doesn't work on the Moon. Explain that!

Re: Our Fate Is in the Stars

#12

Post by coldtea »

Razengan wrote: post #5
coldtea wrote: post #4

There's no "fate" and no contract we've signed that guaranteers we're an interplanetary species. It's just that we wish we could be in the stars, but wishing doesn't always make it so. And in some cases, wishing never makes it so. Especially without installed bases, big haul ability, etc, it takes trillions and has zero to no returns (except the glory, curiosity, and scientific value) for companies to go to the plane…

If we die out here on our home (as far as we know) planet, then we didn’t “deserve” to colonize other planets anyway. Isn’t that the point of natural selection after all?

I don't think natural selection has a point, or the universe cares for us anymore than it cares for bacteria or inanimate matter.

Re: Our Fate Is in the Stars

#13

Post by coldtea »

tomp wrote: post #6
coldtea wrote: post #4

There's no "fate" and no contract we've signed that guaranteers we're an interplanetary species. It's just that we wish we could be in the stars, but wishing doesn't always make it so. And in some cases, wishing never makes it so. Especially without installed bases, big haul ability, etc, it takes trillions and has zero to no returns (except the glory, curiosity, and scientific value) for companies to go to the plane…

Wishes make profit. What is the use of an iPhone beyond satisfying people's wishes? Yet Apple is a $1bn company.

Products that fulfill wishes make profit.

Wishes by themselves don't make anything.

In other words, wishing it so doesn't make it so. It takes a lot of further action on top of the wishing.

Re: Our Fate Is in the Stars

#14

Post by martythemaniak »

idlewords wrote: post #10

This is an odd piece of nostalgia, unfortunately representative of a genre. The Apollo program grew directly out of a panic about nuclear weapons, and the technological race to build rockets that could rain those weapons down on an adversary on the other side of the planet. No nuclear bomb, no Apollo. The same geopolitical conflict that produced the space race also gave us the war in Vietnam, which in turn made the e…

It is well understood that history not a nice, neat, little linear progression. It is full of stop and starts, stagnation, dizzying S-curves, revolutions, backlashes and regressions.

Apollo was a wonder, yes an outgrowth of the arms race, but also a manifestation of a purposeful and unified nation that just doesn't exist today. It was unsustainable, but it was also very long time ago.

I find your views that "things are hard, so we shouldn't do that, and we should never get off this planet" unfortunately common. Here's two things to consider:

- Sending people to space is not just fancy. Today's robotic missions are like trying to fill a swimming pool with a pipette. In 7 years Curiosity has driven a total of 8.6km - an slow afternoon stroll for a person. Every single little action is planned and executed at an excruciatingly slow pace. Nothing can be fixed or adjusted. InSight ran into a rock and now it might not be able to burrow it's instrument down. Digging down 3m might prove too much for that robot, a trivial task for any human.

- If humans don't have outward goals, we're much more likely to just look inward and spend our collective energy tearing each other apart. Without looking outwards, the entire Earth will become one giant vapid high school.

Re: Our Fate Is in the Stars

#15

Post by coldtea »

trevyn wrote: post #7
coldtea wrote: post #4

There's no "fate" and no contract we've signed that guaranteers we're an interplanetary species. It's just that we wish we could be in the stars, but wishing doesn't always make it so. And in some cases, wishing never makes it so. Especially without installed bases, big haul ability, etc, it takes trillions and has zero to no returns (except the glory, curiosity, and scientific value) for companies to go to the plane…

I think certain things feel pre-ordained for some, and like an unfolding of human destiny for others, because they are a tangible expression of common, shared human desires. You’re right that economic and other concerns influence the specific timing, but I think the core human drives of growth and exploration are enough to drive us to the stars again in time, even without direct economic incentives.

I think a lot of people get too hyped up by farfetched sci-fi ideas, than actually study the logistics.

Some still take the logistics of sending a small crew for a visit at the moon (which are still over the top, and we've still haven't managed to repeat in 50+ years) and wish them away through handwaving to "colonies on Mars" and "colonizing the stars".

(Meanwhile we have the far more human friendly oceans, right here on Earth, which we haven't colonized yet -- a common theme in the 70s --, and we seriously discuss man kind living on foreign planets and what have you, with 1000x the difficulties).

Re: Our Fate Is in the Stars

#16

Post by Chris_Chambers »

axelfontaine wrote: post #3
alexgmcm wrote: post #2

There are currently four living people who have walked on the moon, the youngest of which is 83: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_who_have_walked... It is probable that we will return to there being no living humans who have walked on the moon - something which must have been unimaginable at the end of the Apollo Project.

The incredible thing is that nobody born after 1935 has ever walked on the moon!

The really incredible thing is that nobody has ever walked on the moon.

Re: Our Fate Is in the Stars

#17

Post by idlewords »

martythemaniak wrote: post #14
idlewords wrote: post #10

This is an odd piece of nostalgia, unfortunately representative of a genre. The Apollo program grew directly out of a panic about nuclear weapons, and the technological race to build rockets that could rain those weapons down on an adversary on the other side of the planet. No nuclear bomb, no Apollo. The same geopolitical conflict that produced the space race also gave us the war in Vietnam, which in turn made the e…

It is well understood that history not a nice, neat, little linear progression. It is full of stop and starts, stagnation, dizzying S-curves, revolutions, backlashes and regressions. Apollo was a wonder, yes an outgrowth of the arms race, but also a manifestation of a purposeful and unified nation that just doesn't exist today. It was unsustainable, but it was also very long time ago. I find your views that "things a…

Apollo was not the product of a 'purposeful and unified nation'. The period 1961-1972 was one of the most politically turbulent in American history, to an extent we forget today. Politically motivated bombings were routine news! Apollo was the product of its time in interesting ways, but let's not deceive ourselves about America in 1969 being any more unified and purposeful than it is today.

I have nothing against doing hard things, but I think sending people to Mars is a hard, dumb thing, and that the money for that will be better spent on mechanized probes to more interesting places (like Ganymede or Europa) along with space telescopes. Other people feel differently!

But I am tired of the amount of special pleading in this debate. Everything is hard on Mars, because it is on Mars. Antarctica has water and all the air you can breathe, and yet we can barely function there. If we send people to Mars, it will be a one-shot deal like Apollo was, and then all the space nerds will be sad again. Better to fund robots at 1/10 of the level of a manned mission, and get to explore the entire solar system instead. If people are dead set on humanity having a 'backup plan', then the Moon is right next door and we can even set it up with wifi.

Re: Our Fate Is in the Stars

#18

Post by classicsnoot »

It is probably a good thing that Asimov, Clarke, Feynman, Sagan, and Tesla don't have to see who inherited their legacies of thought, ambition, and deed.

Imagine explaining to any one of them that the imagination and impetus of the future man, imbued with technology and options, is completely given over to spam email, ICOs, and dressing up 90s code as "innovation" so they can cash out early.

I've been feeling this place degrade over time, and this thread is a red flag.

SlackerNews: we know better; we won't change.

Re: Our Fate Is in the Stars

#19

Post by monkeynotes »

coldtea wrote: post #12
Razengan wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we die out here on our home (as far as we know) planet, then we didn’t “deserve” to colonize other planets anyway. Isn’t that the point of natural selection after all?

I don't think natural selection has a point, or the universe cares for us anymore than it cares for bacteria or inanimate matter.

Although, natural selection does have a bias toward propagating and persisting information. Since the information is part of the universe I would say some of the universe exhibits intent. Bacteria is part of the life, inanimate matter became life, life is a vehicle of transmitting and persisting information.

To think about 'us' as something other than the universe is a folly. If we care, then part of the universe cares because we are part of the whole.

Re: Our Fate Is in the Stars

#20

Post by antisemiotic »

coldtea wrote: post #15
trevyn wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think certain things feel pre-ordained for some, and like an unfolding of human destiny for others, because they are a tangible expression of common, shared human desires. You’re right that economic and other concerns influence the specific timing, but I think the core human drives of growth and exploration are enough to drive us to the stars again in time, even without direct economic incentives.

I think a lot of people get too hyped up by farfetched sci-fi ideas, than actually study the logistics. Some still take the logistics of sending a small crew for a visit at the moon (which are still over the top, and we've still haven't managed to repeat in 50+ years) and wish them away through handwaving to "colonies on Mars" and "colonizing the stars". (Meanwhile we have the far more human friendly oceans, right he…

An Orion Drive spacecraft could easily carry an entire city block to orbit in one go, but the environmentalist killjoys don't want to hear about it.
Post reply on HN