How unique is 'Earth-like' life in the universe?

Discussion in 'Science' started by Medieval Man, Nov 5, 2017.

  1. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,370
    Likes Received:
    9,297
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What would be the point of going to a star if we simply built a huge station and moved there instead.
     
  2. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I know 60K mph is not fast when we're talking astronomical distances but it's the best we can do today...or 38K mph? And even though it's slow it would be pretty neat to have a spaceship with a couple hundred passengers buzzing through our solar system then on to the next solar system...no matter the amount of time. And I would guess that as technology advanced for faster travel it can be retrofitted while in space...depending on the required materials and processes. Even the second launch could bring the new technology to the first spaceship? No matter the speed of the spaceship it's a pipe dream due to the amount of money required.

    Regarding navigating at very high speeds I was thinking more about smaller objects that we don't know exist and cannot preprogram...like asteroids or other space junk.

    And the other unknown is the effects high speed, low gravity, interstellar travel might have on humans and cargo? Maybe living organisms from Earth simply cannot deal with that kind of travel?

    Yes...always enjoy the discussion...
     
  3. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Curiosity...
     
  4. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Human manifest destiny mainly and the drive for us as a species to go and colonize another world. That drive is innate in human beings. Right now our goals are to get people to Mars and start a colony there. In a few decades or hundred years that Mars colony will continue to grow and eventually likely become it's own self sustaining planet outside of Earth. Then we will want to colonize other places, maybe floating airship cities in the atmosphere of Venus, or colonies on Ganymede, etc. Once we do all of that then we will just want to keep on going, it's how we humans are we are designed that way by nature.

    You are right though and it does actually make sense in the long run to just build a bunch of huge space stations to put people on if we are so keen on getting off of Earth. Especially when as crazy as it might sound it is literally more feasible for human beings to build the actual Death Star than it is to send human beings to another star lol
     
  5. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree it would be cool to see humans build a generation ship. I would give anything to be alive at a time when I could at least see the internet pictures of engineers building a huge ship like that up in orbit. I will likely be long dead by the time we humans even begin construction on anything like that but I wish I could at least see them start. It's sadly just not anywhere near feasible right now nor will it be any time soon. For one the costs would be mind blowing, it would take trillions of dollars to build something like that right now. And the biggest problem is that it just wouldn't make any sense whatsoever outside of "it's cool" and nobody is going to fund that. Trying to find investors to help build a spaceship that will get to its destination 50,000 years from now is unlikely...I absolutely love Astronomy and Astrophysics, but even I wouldn't donate even 5 dollars for something like that.

    Whether or not this theoretical spaceship could be retrofitted while in space is debatable for sure but highly doubtful. Most of the theoretical propulsion drives that we have come up with require different sources of fuel for one. So lets say we launch our spaceship with huge ion drives because they are the most fuel efficient. Ion drives are electric propulsion systems that accelerate ridiculously slow but take virtually no fuel to move. We have those now on some space probes. New Dawn uses one. Then lets say our next spaceship is powered by nuclear fusion drives. Those require actual fuel in the form of Helium-3 and Deuterium. Fusion drives are actually being considered for interstellar missions right now because they can provide enough speed to get a probe to Alpha Centauri in about 100 years or so. So they are a plausible candidate for our next spaceship to use.

    So we'd have to first mine enough Helium-3 to use for fuel (I don't feel like doing all the math to determine how much would be needed to accelerate a huge generation ship with X amount of mass). So we'll just say it will require A LOT, because it will. And we have to mine it from the Moon because that's the closet place to us that has the amounts we need to power stuff like this. So we have to mine enough to power our current ship AND enough to give to our old ship as well as drag along the engineering stuff and parts and pieces and engines themselves to transfer to our old ship. We also have to match velocities with our old slower ship in mid flight which will cause us to expend fuel slowing down. Then transfer the stuff, then speed back up again which requires more fuel. Way too much and virtually impossible to do.

    In regards to navigation, still your concerns are unnecessary. There isn't even that much "small stuff" in space in regards to the amount of "space" there is in space. Even the most dense part of our Solar System is virtually empty. New Horizons (the probe that went to Pluto) is currently on its way out into the Keiper Belt which is the "most dense" part of our Solar System with the most stuff floating around out there. New Horizons doesn't have a projected path that NASA preprogrammed so that it doesn't hit something out there and they are worried about it, but actually the opposite. New Horizons is stuck on a pretty much straight line because it doesn't have the fuel to move very much. So once it got past Pluto there was a rush for NASA to find something in it's path that it WOULD get close enough to for it to actually study. And luckily the were able to find a couple things that it will fly "close" enough by to study them. And by "close" we're talking several thousand miles.

    Like I said you have to really "try" to run into something in space. NASA wasn't panicking because New Horizons might hit something in our densest part of the Solar System because it can't move out of the way, they were worried that it wouldn't even get close enough to anything in our densest part of the Solar System for them to look at because it can't move :wink:

    It wouldn't be the low gravity that screws up the crew on long missions but rather cabin fever and psychological effects of being on a spaceship with only a few hundred other people until you die. A ship expected to travel that far wouldn't be like what you see in the ISS with Astronauts floating around in low gravity. It would likely by a cylindrical ship that simulated 1g by spinning on it's axis with floors on the walls and ceiling and things like that like that colony ship at the end of the movie Interstellar if you've seen that movie.
     
  6. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,370
    Likes Received:
    9,297
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Agreed....but there is no reason we could not simply move the station as easily as a ship.
     
  7. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,370
    Likes Received:
    9,297
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So...we move the station. In space the shape and size do not effect mobility.
     
  8. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Because of the required costs and yet unproven drive technology it's obvious it will be many decades before this can possibly happen. And I would donate my latte money for such a venture because unless we discover some new physics some type of multi-generational spaceship will be the natural progression for Earthlings to leave this rock and venture out. First this will be to explore our closest neighbors but once we start thinking about exploring the outer half of our solar system we might as well be prepared, like Voyager 1&2, to keep on trucking to the next solar system. Prior to this we will put some more humans on the Moon, maybe a small colony on the Moon, then get a couple of humans to Mars, maybe a small colony, but then what do we do without the capability to have multi-generational space travel? We can hope that within the next 100 years we can develop better/faster drive technologies that can greatly reduce interstellar travel time...but even with much higher speeds it will still be a one-way ticket on a multi-generational cruise.

    I can imagine that retrofitting an orbiting spaceship with new drive technology will be a logistical nightmare...a huge challenge. But maybe we get lucky? Maybe a new ship replaces an old ship? Maybe when a ship is considered spent is where we build another colony? We're talking about 100's of years of time for such a venture so I'm thinking there will be lots of possibilities we don't know about today.

    Again, I understand the logistics, but it's unlikely we will ever have all the answers by launch day. So we go with what we got and venture out.

    We also don't know all of whats 'out there'? Do we 'panic' more knowing we have human passengers aboard? Does it make a difference if we have 2 passengers versus 200? IMO we're not going to reach these types of speeds anyway so a moot point.

    I'm thinking humans will be challenged by all sorts of issues; variable gravity, confinement, time, personalities, light, boredom, fear, unknown physiological issues, a lack of good looking women, etc...
     
  9. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Call it whatever you wish but it must be multi-generational sustainable and like Nightmare says it will take a very long time so from this time perspective it almost seems a stupid thing to attempt...but I continue to prefer that we keep our space exploration idea moving forward and IMO a large spaceship will be the answer...
     
    tecoyah likes this.
  10. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We actually have a better understanding of whats out there than you may believe. We understand how solar systems form and we understand that most of the "stuff" in a galaxy is revolving around stars unless you are in a nebula or something. Even within a solar system we see how far away stuff is from each other. Space is enormous and the stuff in space is tiny compared to the amount of space itself. Granted there is some stuff out there that is floating around between the stars but I mean you would have to be ridiculously lucky (unlucky) to hit anything. It would basically be like to kids with BB guns on opposite sides of Yankee Stadium trying to shoot their guns and make their BB's collide in mid air. It's virtually impossible to do that there's simply way too much volume in a stadium in regards to those 2 tiny BB's.

    There is some stuff out there that we cannot see in visible light such as a super cool Brown Dwarf that only emits IR radiation so it's invisible to the naked eye. But even in regards to something as huge as that, you have a better chance of hitting the jackpot lottery 5x in a row than accidentally running into one of those on your way to your destination star.

    Sci-Fi and pop culture have put a false image into peoples heads about how space actually is. We see moves like Star Wars where the heros are ducking and dodging their way through asteroid belts and things like that when in reality I could drop you in the middle of the densest part of the asteroid belt and you would look like you were in the middle of deep space because you wouldn't see any asteroids. Well you might see a couple out in the distance as tiny specs if you looked close enough or had a telescope with you and knew where to look.

    When I say "nothing" I don't technically mean "nothing" I mean nothing relatively big. There is a lot of space dust and micrometeorites out there that our probes DO have to contend with. Because of this probes are shielded with what's referred to as Whipple Shielding which is basically body armor for the probe. A generation ship would certainly have to contend with that and would certainly have to have some type of armor to protect it.

    Once we start talking about speeds in the fractions of light speed then those tiny particles start to become more troublesome and a ship would need some sort of shielding to protect it. At those speeds I do believe dust particles basically ionize and become some sort of plasma or something I think. Not too sure I haven't researched that subject in awhile.

    So yes there is "stuff" in space just not a lot of big stuff like large asteroids or planets or anything.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2017
  11. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,467
    Likes Received:
    16,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ignoring the solid rocket booster fuel, the space shuttles required $1.3 Million in fuel per launch.

    If you added 10 passengers, that's still $130,000 on the ticket price just in fuel - as if rocket ships will be free and surely SpaceX won't want a profit on a billion dollar project, right?

    So, I think it will remain a game for those who get the Trump tax cuts.

    I'm much more interested in the science.

    On the other hand, if flying someone around the solar system would inspire kids to get science and engineering degrees, and we can't figure out any other way to get that excitement going, maybe it would pay off in the long run.
     
  12. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There was actually a legitimate plan by NASA to build a space station that looked like the USS Enterprise from Star Trek and park it in orbit. The thinking was that a cool design like that would inspire more people about space and get more average folks interested in Astronomy and of course children.

    It was of course cancelled because of the cost and logistics of such a feat but I did find it pretty cool and a bit humorous that they were considering that. I wish they would have had the money to build it, I'd certainly get excited seeing a United Star Ship in orbit even if it wasn't actually a functional one.
     
  13. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,467
    Likes Received:
    16,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I didn't realize that!

    But, with that kind of money we could help many who are qualified, but who can't afford college a chance to get a degree.

    Creating more demand for college is a great idea, but we can't handle the demand we have today.

    University of Southern California (USC) received more than 54,000 applications this year, accepting fewer than 9,000. Tuition and mandatory fees are $69,700. This is a standard problem, not even slightly unique to this one state school.

    I know many apply to more than one college, but seriously, we're not addressing the need we already have, even discounting those who are blocked from applying by the financial situation into which they were born.
     
  14. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,271
    Likes Received:
    22,660
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How Much Would It Cost to Build Star Trek’s Starship Enterprise Today?
     
  15. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,467
    Likes Received:
    16,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I might be OK with using the DoD budget for that (as hinted at in the article) as long as it didn't reduce our already meager investment in science.

    Getting the DoD focused on a life size mockup of an old TV show prop would be a good change of pace for America.
     
  16. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I know our understanding of 'what's out there' gets better each day but my comments were more about what we don't know? And I wasn't quantifying their size but will say anything that can do serious harm to a spaceship. I suspect as our knowledge of drive systems and higher speeds develop so will our ability to detect more objects during navigation. Regarding those BB's colliding...I'm a firm believer in Murphy's Law and **** happens.

    Although Sci-Fi has created false information it has also on occasion been quite prophetic. Any of us who have watched Sci-Fi movies, one of my favorites The Day The Earth Stood Still, are obviously tainted with the fiction. But I think it's also good when people use these fictional images to dream or fantasize about ET's, giving them hope, or sometimes fear, that there are others out there.

    For many of us it's just a bunch of expensive and meaningless research while others of us believe there's so much more to the story, and sadly for old guys like me in the latter group, I won't experience these potential discoveries unless they happen very soon. And this fact that we know each of us are going to kick the bucket some day, that we are mere biological units along for the ride on Earth, tells me that the Universe is probably filled with life forms from single-celled to highly advanced. If not it would be a huge waste of space!
     
  17. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,467
    Likes Received:
    16,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Definitely. And, without that speed, things are pretty darn empty out there.

    Plus, there is another problem you're probably aware of right here in earth orbit.

    From Fraser Cain:
    https://www.universetoday.com/42198/how-many-satellites-in-space/

    "We might seal ourselves inside a shield of shrieking metal moving at 29,000 km/hour."

    Now, there is something to think about!
     
  18. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree, I hate to see those interested in higher education denied due to lack of money. That's a sad state of affairs. Who knows how many bright young minds have gone to waste. We are getting better though, although burdensome, college loans have become very common and the main roadblock now for folks isn't the money but rather getting accepted. In today's day and age if you want to attend college you likely can with the amount of loans out there. It may not necessarily be the college of choice but it would be college nonetheless.

    I also believe one of the reasons Astronomy and Astrophysics isn't as popular is because of the limited amount of decent jobs in that field compared to say, business. And Astrophysics is HARD. Astrophysics is basically just a super math and physics (also math) degree with some Astronomy classes sprinkled in there. Which is of course necessary to the field but quite difficult, much like engineering. I love Astrophysics and Astronomy but I don't have a degree in it. I did very well in all math courses up until Calculus then for some reason my brain just quit working. I aced Pre-Calculus with a legitimate 98%. I got to Calculus and struggled hard to maintain a C. Physics hurt me bad, and Calculus II and Physics II was the nail in the coffin for me.

    I understand enough math and physics to understand the concepts of many of these super equations used in Astrophysics, mainly enough to understand that the equation does actually verify what someone just said, but I myself can't actually come up with the equation.

    Sort of like learning a second language. At the novice level I can sort of understand a conversation being held in the native tongue or at the very least understand the concept of the discussion even if I can't make out all of the words, but I myself cannot converse in the language yet. That's about how I am with Astrophysics super math talk.

    I have a good friend who has a degree in Chemical Engineering who is an avid Astronomy fan like myself. We discuss Astronomy a lot and sometimes I'll ask him a question and he will sit there for a moment and try to think of how to explain it to me in "layman's terms" and can't, then will grab a piece of paper and write out a huge equation on it and say "that's why". I'm fascinated by people who can do that I wish I could.
     
    Merwen and WillReadmore like this.
  19. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree 100%. I'm glad that the average joe can gain an interest in Astronomy via Sci-Fi. Star Wars being one of the biggest franchises of all time is awesome and it shows that people are interested in space. I mean come on we all know that the light saber battles are cool, but watching X-Wings and TIE Fighters dogfighting in outer space is the best part of the movie :wink:

    The only negative though if that sci fi causes a lot of folks to have unrealistic expectations about our own current technology. So after watching something like Star Wars then many average folks don't really think something like James Webb is really that cool or interesting.

    I remember many years ago I was in my backyard with my telescope looking up at the sky like always. My neighbors kid strolled over and asked if he could take a look and I said sure of course. I wanted him to see something "cool" and Saturn just so happened to be visible so I typed the coordinates to it on my laptop and let him see Saturn. He wasn't impressed lol. He basically said "that's kind of cool, why does it look all blurry like that cant you make it look like the pictures".

    The kid was like 9 or 10 I believe so he probably didn't understand that the super HD pictures of Saturn he can pull up on his smartphone are from Hubble or Cassini and that my measly telescope can't take pictures like that. But he was so accustomed to seeing Saturn that way that he thought my backyard telescope would produce a similar image.

    Basically we humans, especially in the last century or so, have become so used to rapid advances in technology that we expect certain things now and Space gets sucked into that loop pretty often. A lot of folks figured that we put man on the Moon in 1969, based on the way everything else has advanced so quickly we figured we'd have a full blown Mars colony by 2017. I mean we went from playing snake on brick cell phones to 4K display super computer smart phones in 10 years. We went from the Wright Brothers to F-22 fighter jets and Space Shuttles in less than 100 years. But unfortunately Space doesn't really fall into that category because Space is just so freakin' huge and the logistics of Space travel are monumental.

    It's great to dream big, but Space is one of those things that slaps people with reality way more often than I wish it had to. It's one of the reasons I worry about James Webb and what that telescope is going to do for public perception. Many folks see it as a successor to Hubble, which it is kind of, but they are expecting it to do something Hubble can't do. It will do so much more than Hubble can do but to the average joe (and Congress) it won't show them anything "cooler" than Hubble already does which I believe will upset a lot of people.
     
  20. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually if we never had SciFi presented to the public, 95% of that public would have little interest in space exploration. As it is, a huge percentage of the 95% today either refuse or are reluctant to fund space exploration. Some of this stems from religious beliefs and some from ignorance and some from politics. Last I read the NASA budget was maybe $18 billion which is about .45% of the annual budget...pathetic!

    What percentage of Americans have actually visited any observatory? What percentage of Americans own a telescope and actually study the sky? How many Americans think science is a discipline?

    And many of those images shared with the public are graphic depictions but the public does not care.

    Recently the technology can move faster than public funding. We could have colonized the Moon or Mars by now but too much money required. The money will always be the anchor!

    It's like the Large Hadron Collider which 95-99% of the American public will never relate...
     
  21. primate

    primate Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2014
    Messages:
    1,205
    Likes Received:
    370
    Trophy Points:
    83
    That’s reasonably settled as being a priority. That doesn’t preclude advanced civilizations existing without a sizeable moon.
     
  22. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,271
    Likes Received:
    22,660
    Trophy Points:
    113
  23. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,467
    Likes Received:
    16,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
  24. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,271
    Likes Received:
    22,660
    Trophy Points:
    113

    ? Not getting the context of your reply.
     
  25. Medieval Man

    Medieval Man Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Messages:
    3,406
    Likes Received:
    1,696
    Trophy Points:
    113

Share This Page