Hawking on mars travel

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

alokmohan

Guest
HONG KONG - The survival of the human race depends on its ability to find new homes elsewhere in the universe because there's an increasing risk that a disaster will destroy the Earth, world-renowned astrophysicist Stephen Hawking said Tuesday. <br /><br />ADVERTISEMENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Humans could have a permanent base on the moon in 20 years and a colony on Mars in the next 40 years, the British scientist told a news conference.<br /><br />"We won't find anywhere as nice as Earth unless we go to another star system," added Hawking, who arrived in Hong Kong to a rock star's welcome Monday. Tickets for his lecture planned for Wednesday were sold out.<br /><br />He added that if humans can avoid killing themselves in the next 100 years, they should have space settlements that can continue without support from Earth.<br /><br />"It is important for the human race to spread out into space for the survival of the species," Hawking said. "Life on Earth is at the ever-increasing risk of being wiped out by a disaster, such as sudden global warming, nuclear war, a genetically engineered virus or other dangers we have not yet thought of."<br /><br />The 64-year-old scientist — author of the global best seller "A Brief History of Time" — is wheelchair-bound and communicates with the help of a computer because he suffers from a neurological disorder called amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or ALS.<br /><br />Hawking said he's teaming up with his daughter to write a children's book about the universe, aimed at the same age group as the Harry Potter books.<br /><br />"It is a story for children, which explains the wonders of the universe," said his daughter, Lucy, a journalist and novelist. They didn't provide other details.<br />
 
D

dragon04

Guest
I think I own all the books that Hawking has published. And I don't disagree that eventually, we will need to spread out.<br /><br />The real question is one of need not on terms of decades or centuries, but of milennia.<br /><br />This may sound contradictory coming out of a "pro-space" person, but honestly, what's the hurry? As far as we know now, we have a couple billion years at the least before leaving the nest is anything but a passing concern.<br /><br />Potential natural disasters are an unknown, and frankly speculative concern. Man made catastrophes, on the other hand are of legitimate concern.<br /><br />Metaphorically speaking, we do indeed have all our eggs in one basket in 2006. Unfortunately, in order to start and maintain a viable population on Mars, would require a prohibitive amount of resources in terms of money.<br /><br />Lifting significant mass off of Earth is still very expensive. We have economical ways to do it, but multiple nuclear pulse driven spacecraft launched from the surface would be an environmental catastrophe in itself.<br /><br />I agree with his assessment. However, there are issues with the timetable. <br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!".</em> </div>
 
V

vandivx

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>multiple nuclear pulse driven spacecraft launched from the surface would be an environmental catastrophe in itself<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />with people like you, I have to say lets stay put and forget going anywhere<br /><br />I mean how do people propose to settle Mars or any place when they want to baby environment by conserving it and are concerned about their health verging on hypochondria (that's reality these days). Doing something on Mars for example to alter its atmoshpere so we could settle there without spending life in some gas tanks there, what horror they would scream. Besides if it was altered nobody would ever believe it was 100% healthy LOL which it wouldn't be I admit. <br /><br />When I read about Hawkins in news, I thought his reason for going to planets would be some potential for asteroid collision, instead it seems he is suspicious of humanity. But the thing is, he might be right with the West codling Iran these days instead of landing several nuclear bombs there to get rid of the savages threatening with nuclear weapons. I find it trully ridiculous that instead of such simple and surefire solutions to deal with the various barbaric tribes of earth, we would be considering moving to Mars or Moon. <br /><br />vanDivX <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
Q

qso1

Guest
alokmohan excerpt from Hawking speach:<br />"such as sudden global warming"<br /><br />Me:<br />It would have to be sudden but two problems arise just out of this scenario. A sudden global warming and I'm assuming Hawkings means no more than a few years, will find us not ready to go anywhere, especially if it occurs within say, 25 years.<br /><br />The longer term warming were hearing about now won't prompt any sort of space exodus because we cannot even agree if were causing the warming. As it is, its only finally been recently acknowledged more or less that such a warming is underway. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>
 
R

rogers_buck

Guest
I believe there is more reason behind Hawking's insistance on the matter of the human race spreading out into space than the reasons he gives in public. Hawking has also warned that the human race needs to better interface with its machines and/or genetically engineer itself to keep up with its machines. I believe these dire warnings are related and the root reason relates to a lifetime studying entropy and black holes.<br /><br />Let's consider a far simpler universe from a perspective we can never enjoy from the inside. Imagine it to be the globe cosmologists frequently use with a north pole representing the initian quantum states of the universe and the south pole representing the final quantum states of the universe.<br /><br />Sum over histories tells us that there are infinite paths between these two poles and they all exist simultaneously in imaginary time. Eventually, all the paths except for the direct transition will be interfered out of existence.<br /><br />Now let's peek onto the surface of the globe. We know that the lines of latitude are imaginary time but we find a strange tensor fields resulting from the differential order between the two poles. These fields are manifest and entangled with the imaginary time and form the basis of thermodynamics and our perception of reality.<br /><br />Now at any arbitrary point on the surface take a look around and you will find plausible histories for your being there and viable memories of the past. You will not remember the future but your higher brain functions will be all about predicting the future. You are trapped in the field to a degree and you will observe the interference of paths as decay and implausible decisions. <br /><br />Since imaginary time is euclidean end quantum states that become coherent will feedback into your reality as inventions, progress, a good year, etc. But this is true IF and ONLY IF you are still part of history and not part of decay.<br /><br />So, in our simplistic globe universe, ev
 
B

bonzelite

Guest
i think it's inevitable that humans will become spacefaring colonists. but i think it will not happen within 2 or 3, possibly 10 lifetimes. i think for our generation and the next, we can hope to see a couple of trips to the moon and maybe one to mars. and they will be brief and exploratory at best. it will take centuries to establish people in outer space and on other planets. probably the equivalent task of the american colonies breaking free from the mother country england to establish it's own identity. much hardship and trial ensued to make such an idea of the united states a reality. such will be true of interplanetary human travel and colonization. give it a few hundred years. <br /><br />brief human experimental visits to mars in our lifetimes? sure. maybe once. or twice. they'll walk around for a few hours and then return to earth. but they have to make these cursory ventures or nothing else can follow.
 
B

brellis

Guest
I saw a lecture by Hawking in the early 1980's, and here he is 25 years later. His mind seems to be so strong and eager that it has dragged his body through decades surviving a disease that usually kills after months. It's wonderful that at this stage of his life he wants to communicate to the youngest minds.<br /><br />On a thread around here, someone suggested that China will likely be first to have the gumption, as well as the material and human resources, to start a process of one-way missions to Mars. Curious how the Judeo-Christian ethic presents a theoretical challenge to one-way explorative missions whereas the Eastern ethic of the "recycled soul" wouldn't stand in the way of proposing a "suicide mission" to Mars. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#ff0000"><em><strong>I'm a recovering optimist - things could be better.</strong></em></font> </p> </div>
 
R

robnissen

Guest
" the West codling Iran these days instead of landing several nuclear bombs there to get rid of the savages threatening with nuclear weapons."<br /><br />Amazing. Said without a touch of irony. Let's actually USE nuclear weapons to killl millions of Iranians including children "to get rid of the savages [who] THREATEN [us] with nuclear weapons."<br /><br />I sure am glad you are not a savage like them.
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
More amazing comments whout a touch of irony:<br /><br />"In reply to:<br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />multiple nuclear pulse driven spacecraft launched from the surface would be an environmental catastrophe in itself<br /><br /><br /><br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br /><br />with people like you, I have to say lets stay put and forget going anywhere <br /><br />I mean how do people propose to settle Mars or any place when they want to baby environment by conserving it and are concerned about their health verging on hypochondria (that's reality these days). Doing something on Mars for example to alter its atmoshpere so we could settle there without spending life in some gas tanks there, what horror they would scream. Besides if it was altered nobody would ever believe it was 100% healthy LOL which it wouldn't be I admit."<br /><br />In other words, let's wreck our planet's beautiful, self sustaining environment in the off chance we might be able to make one on Mars.<br /><br />Jon<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
E

enigma10

Guest
You know , for decades poeple like myself have been saying this. Now, because he says it, its news? wtf. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"<font color="#333399">An organism at war with itself is a doomed organism." - Carl Sagan</font></em> </div>
 
V

vandivx

Guest
ok, there was a touch of overdoing it, conventional bombs would be better to start with, I don't think they would warrant nuclear strike as things stand.<br /><br />I don't believe in 'innocent people' and only evil leaders, those children are just growing up to be new leaders or their henchmen tomorrow, best of some theocratic dictatorship and their mothers approve of that wholeheartedly today. If they don't, they better leave the country soon if they know what's good for them, if they will stay, they will just become victims of their leadership since it will be them who will have led them to death - by in turn issuing threats to free people abroad, not us who will simply respond to the threat (which is not empty threat btw). <br /><br />We can only wish that they would have as much regard for us, for out children like some here might mistakenly have for them, when they do decide to launch attack on us one day. They certainly don't show any signs of that if the terrorist attacks give any clue or how they treat their own people.<br /><br />as to Hawking, some scientists that seem to know a little of what they are about suggested that it would be much better choice for us in face of some dangers to burry ourselves under polar caps underground, that that would be much more doable than any migration to another planet, which is unrealistic for a long time yet. I personally concur with that view. Bonzelite above here has very sensible estimate of space travel/migration too.<br /><br />Of course if it was some iminent and such serious danger for which burrying underground wouldn't be enough protection, then we should just be merry while we can and that would be it.<br /><br />vanDivX <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts