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.
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.
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.
Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible.
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.
I'm very excited about kinetic gun type launch tech. Its way to harsh for humans, but it could get cargo to space very cheaply. If that were true the building blocks for a huge space station suddenly become much more economically feasible.
Kinetic gun type launch is great for transporting materials from earth to within our solar system, we need methods for either the best method that is best suitable for humans to travel in space or humans must adopt to harsh traveling methods.
What would be really be a game changer in this regard is either a Space Elevator type system (which would be really difficult and expensive to build even if we did have suitable materials to do it) or a Reusable Single-Stage To Orbit rocket (even the mighty Starship rocket is two stages, so this is also very difficult to achieve).
As for actual travel in space, faster is better (both in the sense that it limits exposure to cosmic radiation and microgravity, two things proven harmful to human health; and also that it reduces the need to carry a large amount of provisions onboard for a long trip), so it helps for instance to have in-orbit refuelling capability (so you can actually use your rocket engine to propel you faster) or different engines such as nuclear propulsion engines that have better performance than existing chemical rockets.