Why Humans will Never Colonize Space

[Binkie The Clown]

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2022/03/ars-talks-to-werner-herzog-about-space-colonization-its-poetry/

Why Werner Herzog thinks human space colonization “will inevitably fail”
Herzog and son discuss their new Discovery+ documentary, Last Exit: Space.

(SNIP)

Along the way, Last Exit: Space follows a pattern. First, it lists a problem that might make a certain space travel proposition impossible. Then it briefly explains the most promising solution to that problem as developed by modern science and engineering. Finally, it brings the interstellar dream crashing back down to Earth with a grim recounting of why the solution won't work.

In one scene, a futurologist seen floating on a small boat over an idyllic Idaho river explains his wide-eyed hope for accelerating space flight by combining matter and antimatter, then capturing the resultant photon energy. The film warmly acknowledges that this wild idea does have some scientific merit. The crew travels to the sweeping, beautiful CERN particle accelerator complex in Geneva to have one of its staffers explain the concept and point to physical evidence that his team has indeed captured antimatter, which is held in a tube buffered by electromagnetic shielding.

Soon after, though, the hypothesis is shot down, at least for the time being. The CERN staffer explains that current antimatter generation methods not only consume massive amounts of energy but are also so slow that the amount needed for legitimate rocket propulsion would require billions of years—or, as he counts it, from the moment the Big Bang erupted until the theoretical end of the Universe.

More at the link

[PortTack]

1. The human body isn't designed for it!

[lagomorph777]

3. And we're incapable of solving the medical challenges?

The ISS disproves that point.

Future space travel will depend on solutions such as artificial gravity (e.g. centrifugal or simply engine acceleration). Active radiation shielding will probably be needed. And so on.

[librechik]

19. Maybe we can't, ultimately. Robots make much more reliable astronauts it seems

than humans can ever be. This problem is in need of many more years of study before it can be thought of as practical.

We don't have that kind of time and money.


Tick tock global warming needs trillions in investment right now.

[lagomorph777]

20. Agreed; saving Earth has to be higher priority before we go much farther out.

But to say we will "never ever" colonize anywhere in space is short sighted. I am pretty sure our homo sapiens (or homo erectus) forebears would be fairly surprised by what we've accomplished so far. Maybe disappointed in us, too. It's just arrogant to say we will "never" accomplish something.

[Johnny2X2X]

37. AIs/Robots will explore the cosmos for us

It's kind of a race, what evolves technologically first, AI or the tech to make space travel suitable for human life. Because once AI technology is evolved, sending AIs will the facsimile for sending humans. In short, AIs will be us.

At some point, maybe the human mind becomes downloadable before death and can be uploaded into something that does travel to interstellar destinations. That seems far off, but so does developing the technology to send humans into deep space as is.

We really can't imagine the technology that will exist in 500 years though.

[roamer65]

13. It hasn't evolved for it yet.

The human body will look very different if/when we go amongst the stars permanently.

[NickB79]

25. Simply genetically engineer humans to handle it

Within 50 years genetic engineering and synthetic biology science will be there.

[Johonny]

29. I assume any space colonization will be via a Starman like approach

Where the machine does the traveling and then builds the organic lifeform in situ. It think it's pretty clear where biological science is heading towards.

[lagomorph777]

2. So sad that some have limited capacity to imagine what is yet to come.

Take the matter/antimatter example (assuming you don't consider any part of the Solar System worth colonizing). Yes, antimatter is crazy expensive to manufacture. Using similar methods (and cost) you could manufacture gold. But it makes a lot more sense to "mine" it. You can mine antimatter in the Van Allen radiation belts around the Earth. Combine antiprotons and positrons to make antihydrogen. Freeze it and magnetically bottle it.

But we have centuries to figure out that stuff, if we can stop trashing our own piece of space long enough to do it.

To point-blank say that we will never solve a certain problem is beyond arrogant. It's idiotic.

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. Does that help much?

As the planet’s magnetic field holds the antimatter particles, they spiral along the magnetic field lines. This is a process that continually replenishes itself both for matter and antimatter. Jupiter is a source, but Saturn is even better, for a larger flux enters its atmosphere. Saturn is, in fact, the place where the largest total supply of antiprotons appears, with reactions in its rings injecting 250 micrograms per year into the planet’s magnetosphere.

https://www.centauri-dreams.org/2016/08/03/antimatter-production-harvesting-in-space/

So, the maximum energy from annihilating 250 micrograms of anitprotons and 250 micrograms of protons is 500E-9 kg * (3E8 m/s) squared = 4.5E10 joules. Harvested in a year, which is 4.5E10 / 365 / 24 / 60 / 60 = 1427 watts. We'd be collecting energy at less than the rate of an electric kettle.

[lagomorph777]

11. Hmm, numbers are such a pain.

Well, so much for that notion.

[ForgedCrank]

23. Humans won't go

anywhere beyond our own solar system. We can't. We won't survive the travel times required, and we can't even produce viable offspring without proper gravity. Even IF we could achieve light speed travel, there's nowhere we can go that is worth going.
That's my opinion on the subject anyway.

[Duppers]

35. Agree.

Our biology holds us back and we've yet to figure out how to come over come those problems.

And there's the "Nowhere....worth going.". This is true...that we yet know about.

Yes, so far as we know and we know a lot, it's a desolate, inhabitable space out there.

But where are those UFOs coming from?

[A HERETIC I AM]

39. The understanding of how to create reliable and sustainable artificial gravity has been around...

For better than 50 years.

Building an interstellar spaceship with living spaces that have earth-like gravity is a simple concept and not difficult. The science is well established.

As far as the time issue is concerned, until we are able to beat Einstein’s theorem (Which from my understanding is beatable) then long duration space flight will be generational, meaning the crew will be a colony, each generation training the resultant one in the technical aspects of the mission.

But to say “we can’t” is to ignore more than a half century of science and research on the subject.


https://images.app.goo.gl/dQup7iSmviSRrwXf6

On edit to say this;

By saying “not difficult” what I mean is the processes are already figured out. The ship would have to be built in orbit however, and the majority of the materials used would have to come from the moon or asteroids, as getting them up off this planet would be impractical, if we are suggesting a ship the size of the one depicted in the movie “Passengers”, which I am.

[ForgedCrank]

40. Well, it's not exactly a simple concept.

The Hollywood or simple version of "artificial gravity" is just that, mostly Hollywood. Sure, it can generate G's, but I can't imagine humans tolerating that for the many generations it would take to get to any place worth going. What we are capable of doing just isn't a workable solution to that problem for long term travel.

[Pobeka]

4. Dnd we have to develop the technology before we make earth inhabitable for humans.

There's that...

[Duppers]

36. We must care for our planet earth.

🌎 - it's all we have, so "Give a hoot, don't pollute."

[Basic LA]

5. We need 1G or all bets are off.

Gravity, I think, limits us on other planets more than all the other challenges. As for interstellar travel, the distances are multi- generational at best.

Thanks for the heads up. Can't wait to see his documentary.

[abqtommy]

6. There is a big difference between Science Fact and Science Fiction. In spite of what

the religionists tell us, this Earth is our heaven so let's put our efforts to making it and
our society as beneficial as possible.

[MineralMan]

7. It's simple, really. If we cannot develop the technology and society

to keep our current planet habitable, we certainly can't do it for some other place we have not even discovered yet.

Fix the Earth. Then, think about traveling to the stars. If you can't even manage to fix the Earth, you ain't going to the stars. Period.

[lagomorph777]

12. 100% true. We have to survive for quite a long time here before we can think about going out there.

(Especially for interstellar travel).

[anarch]

26. if we can't fix the Earth, we will die n/t

[MineralMan]

27. Well, certainly many will die if we do not.

A smaller number of humans, however, might survive on the planet.

However, if we leave the planet for unknown new places to live, most who do so will probably also die, since we know of no such places we might go. That was my point.

Our efforts, it seems to me, would be better made to save the one place that we know humans can live, rather than speculate about using some unknown technology that does not yet exist to go to an unknown place we cannot identify.

If we are not able to protect our only home, then I doubt we will be able to come up with an alternative location in time.

Star Trek is fiction. Star Wars is fiction. None of the technology from those fictional stories exists. There is no assurance that anything like that technology will ever exist. The reality is that we have this nice planet that we have evolved to live on. Perhaps we should focus on preserving it, rather than fantasize about some alternative reality.

[anarch]

28. right, exactly

and even if we did have the technology for FTL travel, if we can't fix our problems on this planet, why in the hell should we go and fuck up some other planet? In my opinion, our literal job as humans is to take care of this planet that we live on, it has everything we need if we would just act right.

[MineralMan]

30. Yes, but we don't.

More's the pity.

[anarch]

31. I have a lot of...uhh...thoughts on that

not the least of which is that if you assume there are other sentient life forms out there in the galaxy, they may see it as a good thing that they don't have to deal with a bunch of angry apes at their doorsteps. So like, "thanks goodness" rather than "more's the pity"

[MineralMan]

32. Well, there is that, as well. However, I think it unlikely that we will

ever succeed at interstellar travel, so it's probably something that will not come up. I doubt we will exist as a civilization long enough to develop such technology, since we do not even seem to be able to care for our own planet.

[anarch]

34. my feeling is that we're at an inflection point right now

and things could go in the direction of 'Star Trek,' or they could go in the direction of 'Mad Max.'

And I do think there's some third party dependency here, as in some alien civilization (if such exists and if they have some kind of altruistic mission to help other sentient beings explore their cosmic surroundings) could decide to share their technology with us or let us ride on their spaceships or go through their stargates or wormholes or however it is that it might work.

but it's not even just tech development that's needed for FTL, but a fundamental change in our basic understanding of physics.

the way things are looking, unless someone else intervenes or we collectively all suddenly evolve very, very quickly, we ain't gettin' off of this rock.

[LastDemocratInSC]

9. I am an avid fan and follower of all things related to space. .

But I think the current notions of colonizing any place beyond our planet are foolish. First of all, there is no other place that's habitable. This third rock is the only place. If you want to ride a Musk brand Starship to the Moon or Mars you should practice first by spending a few years confined in a shipping container in your back yard because that's what you'll have for the rest of your life following launch. And if you get to your destination the container will be underground to protect against the harsh radiation on the surface. There will be no sipping wine in a lawn chair outside while admiring the sunset. And your "home" will forever smell just like ISS does today: an unpleasant mix of odors from human waste because people have a daily dependence on some nasty biological processes.

The health risks are significant. On ISS the crews must continuously clean surfaces, tools, experiment racks with germicidal wipes to keep bacteria from getting out of control. That's the trivial part, though, because people will get sick eventually from something and need medical facilities and those will not be the equivalent of even what's available in a small town hospital. Contagious diseases will spread as easily far away as they spread here today and the loss of life could be significant. It's like an army at war: You need lots of people to accommodate anticipated losses.

Enough doom and gloom from me. I just think the colonizers of Mars or the Moon will have a life more like those at the Jamestown colony. Lots of dissension, illness, a crisis every month, famine and eventually a collapse. It won't be like the Jetsons.

The best thing to do now is to stop screwing up what we already have. It's the most perfect habitat for light years.

[genxlib]

10. I was going to say something like that but you summarized nicely

The way I see it, we could essentially destroy the earth into an apocalyptic hell-scape and it would still be the most hospitable spot in the Solar System for us.

We are stuck with the Earth for better or worse.

[Metaphorical]

14. I disagree, but we need to rethink the concept of human here

Take the protoplasm out of the equation (mostly). Get out of the gravity well of Earth where it's not quite so expensive to build and launch spacecraft. Build robotic probes, with ion propulsion or similar systems capable of sustained 3-4G acceleration. Probe runs via artificial general intelligence.

Incorporate multiple genetic printers to custom create life at the other end, suited for the environment. You're still talking decades, but not centuries. Or for that matter stick with robotics. I think this is going to be the case for the foreseeable future, even if we do manage to build Al-Cubierre-White ships.

[Silent3]

15. I think the bigger problem is getting there before we self-destruct

IF (and that's a big if) we don't become so self-destructive we crash global civilization, technology will continue to advance in ways that we can't possibly foresee right now.

I think it's a fairly safe bet that, if we continue with even modest technological progress, some day we will control, in some form or another, the vast supplies of energy needed to make space travel much more practical than it is today. It won't necessarily be in the form of matter/anti-matter annihilation or fusion or fission or anything else currently on our radar.

Even so, it's an entirely different matter whether many humans, or only a few, would choose to colonize other worlds, or perhaps artificial habitats in space. Yet it would only take a few tens of thousands out of all the billions of the people on this planet to get the ball rolling, and then natural population growth among the colonizers would help ensure that humanity has some sort of future beyond Earth.

Then again, we don't even know if humans will replace themselves/be replaced by our technological descendants in the form of robotics, artificial intelligence, and genetic engineering. There's a technological event horizon that we can't see beyond, where intelligences beyond our meager human intellects will be determining what comes next.

[msongs]

16. imagine the volume of the food and water needed to get a few ppl to mars, and ...toilet paper nt

[newdayneeded]

17. The moon

I could only see a robotic created moon base in our future. some sort of domed living village. they can haul people, supplies, and food quite regularly. I would guess more of a scientific outpost.

[Shanti Shanti Shanti]

18. No, we need to rethink what that means, I like using asteroids as colony spaceships, mining, etc

Hollowing out cities inside, protected from radiation, Getting away from the idea of returning to earth, viva belters!

[lagomorph777]

21. I think for many centuries, space will be a temporary industrial workplace.

Not a home or even a vacation spot. There's a lot of material out there that could help us save the Earth - for example, rare-Earth elements needed to build billions of good electric motors and generators, and wean us off of fossil fuels.

[anarch]

22. in my estimation, humans will never travel anywhere meaningful in space

unless and until we figure out a way around the speed of light limitation, which basically means a total change to our understanding of physics. I think the answer lies in the understanding (and potential manipulation) of gravity, perhaps how gravity relates to electro-magnetism. If you had artificial gravity along with FTL travel capabilities, then maybe.

But that's probably (in my opinion) not likely to happen without external help, and even if we did find a way to travel to distant Earth-like planets we might find that they're already occupied, and is it really a great idea to do what Europeans (and homo sapiens in general really) have done to this planet, to other planets?

Sure we can try to colonize planets in our own solar system, but they're mostly inhospitable to human life, so why? We'll almost certainly wind up mining the goddamned asteroids or something if our species survives long enough though. Personally I don't think we should colonize anywhere, and in fact should de-colonize this planet.

[Kid Berwyn]

24. He fergot the dilithium crystals.

[Bonx]

33. I think planets are much more likely

[LiberatedUSA]

38. Maybe we will send AI with frozen embryos.

The AI can then take all the time it needs to get there, then it can grow the new humans to start the population.