There is nothing we need to invent to be able to start a permanent human presence outside near earth orbit.
Transport. Life support. Communication. etc
Wether is it something we should be devoting the level of investment required to do it when there are so many issues that need attention on earth is another matter.
"There is nothing we need to invent to be able to start a permanent human presence outside near earth orbit.Transport. Life support. Communication. etc"
It is not just about 'Transport. Life support. Communication. etc', its about the fuel efficiency, the ability of humans to sustain in space, the ability to have great volumes of food, devote great time and risk, engineering hardships, etc.
"there are so many issues that need" attention on earth is another matter.
Can you specify?
I agree but you will never get support without doing both. The proponents will be labelled as "rats trying to leave a sinking ship.
Off earth colonisation, despite the claims of some, will required 50-100 of continuous investment to become self sufficient. If the climate crisis is not addressed there will not be a nation state able to support it.
When it comes to astrophysics, you may as well quote deadpool: "Maximium effort"
Nothing has in the last century (a time when we have had thousands of astrophysicists working on it) to dismiss the limits that are inherent in space-time as Einstein described.
Humans may get the trip to Alpha Centauri down to 80 years of so, (accelerating to 10% of c at the halfway point) but that is literally next door.
We have the tech to colonise the solar system now. The desire to do so it what is missing.
Any thoughts of travelling to others stars within one human lifetime will always remain SF.
Can you elaborate on "We have the tech to colonise the solar system now."
There is nothing we need to invent to be able to start a permanent human presence outside near earth orbit.
Transport. Life support. Communication. etc
Wether is it something we should be devoting the level of investment required to do it when there are so many issues that need attention on earth is another matter.
"There is nothing we need to invent to be able to start a permanent human presence outside near earth orbit.Transport. Life support. Communication. etc" It is not just about 'Transport. Life support. Communication. etc', its about the fuel efficiency, the ability of humans to sustain in space, the ability to have great volumes of food, devote great time and risk, engineering hardships, etc. "there are so many issues that need" attention on earth is another matter. Can you specify?
The destruction of the climate.
That's why we have to create a space colony and make multiple planets suitable for life. We cant depend on a single planet's climate, etc.
Also - humanity can do multiple things at once. Fixing climate change is a political/tech issue, not a lack of resources issue.
If individuals realize and take actions to stop climate change, we are good to go for it.
I agree but you will never get support without doing both. The proponents will be labelled as "rats trying to leave a sinking ship.
Off earth colonisation, despite the claims of some, will required 50-100 of continuous investment to become self sufficient. If the climate crisis is not addressed there will not be a nation state able to support it.
Yes, we have to (individually) contribute to stop climate change, but also should not be on a single planet's climate, etc.
When it comes to astrophysics, you may as well quote deadpool: "Maximium effort"
Nothing has in the last century (a time when we have had thousands of astrophysicists working on it) to dismiss the limits that are inherent in space-time as Einstein described.
Humans may get the trip to Alpha Centauri down to 80 years of so, (accelerating to 10% of c at the halfway point) but that is literally next door.