New telescope is going to revolutionize what we know about our universe

Reading this thread is a trip. Worse than intro biology SI sessions.

[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]Kind of understand, but if medicine and technology count as part of our evolution then wouldn't DNA modification count as well?[/QUOTE]

Certainly. But what I'm saying is when it comes time to adapt to a new environment we won'tbe nearly as adept at figuring out what changes need to be made as just plain ol evolution would be.

[QUOTE=Take Your Lumps]
I'm not even talking about colonization yet...I do agree some of the technologies required aren't there yet to do that overnight but I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to colonize another planet (or the moon as a trial run) in the next 50 years. Now is the time to continue to do the groundwork required to prepare for colonization and long-range space exploration for future generations.[/QUOTE]

Plus, it also requires research to even be capable of colonization some day. Research comes before technology, ALWAYS. You don't just magically end up with advanced enough technology to colonize elsewhere without lots of research first (maybe centuries' worth of research) and compiling data/information. That is also where sh!ver's thinking is flawed and absolutely not plausible. You don't just go from 'no space research/spending because it's too complex and expensive' to all of a sudden a warp drive.

BTW - a more reasonable estimate for actual colonization.. we are looking at at least ~200 more years within our own solar system. Research continues until we reach a point that we humans can push through to another nearby planet, moon, wherever. We already have the capability and technology to create a very massive platform like ISS, but it costs a lot. Still, it would be absolutely idiotic to think you put research all aside simply because we are not there yet. Takes time.

someone asked me an interesting (and relevant) space travel question the other day-

pretend you won a contest or something, and one of these new privately operated space corporations like [URL="http://www.spacex.com/"]SpaceX[/URL] offered you the chance to be the first human to set foot on mars. you would leave next month. heres the catch:

it takes ~1 year to travel each way, and you will be spending a few months at mars when you get there, so the whole trip will take 2 years absolute minimum.

also, during the trip to mars, you will probably have a ~60% chance of dying. a lot of the technology that will be used is basically unproven, you will only have one month of training/planning, not to mention all of the other dangers of space..... more likely than not, something will go wrong at some point.

i would have to turn the offer down because i dont want to leave my family. however back in the days before i had earthly responsibilities, i probably would have accepted. someday in the not so distant future there will be a first human to set foot on mars, i hope i am still around to see it happen.

[QUOTE=Nanners]someone asked me an interesting (and relevant) space travel question the other day-

pretend you won a contest or something, and one of these new privately operated space corporations like [URL="http://www.spacex.com/"]SpaceX[/URL] offered you the chance to be the first human to set foot on mars. you would leave next month. heres the catch:

it takes ~1 year to travel each way, and you will be spending a few months at mars when you get there, so the whole trip will take 2 years absolute minimum.

also, during the trip to mars, you will probably have a ~60% chance of dying. a lot of the technology that will be used is basically unproven, you will only have one month of training/planning, not to mention all of the other dangers of space..... more likely than not, something will go wrong at some point.

i would have to turn the offer down because i dont want to leave my family. however back in the days before i had earthly responsibilities, i probably would have accepted. someday in the not so distant future there will be a first human to set foot on mars, i hope i am still around to see it happen.[/QUOTE]

I am sure you will see it in your lifetime. The advancements in space is astronomical. We already have bases on the moon, we are developing technologies that will use a tether and act like an elevator to take us from the earth to space bypassing the the atmosphere, and geniuses like Elon Musk are already setting out guidelines on the colonization of Mars.

Space colonization is an undeniable evolution in human kind; it's going to happen sooner than you think.

[QUOTE=bladefd]Plus, it also requires research to even be capable of colonization some day. Research comes before technology, ALWAYS. You don't just magically end up with advanced enough technology to colonize elsewhere without lots of research first (maybe centuries' worth of research) and compiling data/information. That is also where sh!ver's thinking is flawed and absolutely not plausible. You don't just go from 'no space research/spending because it's too complex and expensive' to all of a sudden a warp drive.

BTW - a more reasonable estimate for actual colonization.. we are looking at at least ~200 more years within our own solar system. Research continues until we reach a point that we humans can push through to another nearby planet, moon, wherever. We already have the capability and technology to create a very massive platform like ISS, but it costs a lot. Still, it would be absolutely idiotic to think you put research all aside simply because we are not there yet. Takes time.[/QUOTE]
Good job distorting my position. I never said anything about no funding of space research. Reading comprehension is key here. The goal of NASA over the next 50 years is developing a more efficient fuel and propulsion system.

[QUOTE=shlver]Good job distorting my position. I never said anything about no funding of space research. Reading comprehension is key here. The goal of NASA over the next 50 years is developing a more efficient fuel and propulsion system.[/QUOTE]

You said in numerous posts that it would be pointless to focus on colonizing space because it is 'impossible' and 'too expensive'.

[QUOTE=shlver]Why would we focus efforts on something that might be literally impossible? I'm not sure you understand how much energy, resources, and jumps in technology we would need to colonize space.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=shlver]No, we should be more focused on the ocean or other uninhabited areas on earth for colonization, not space. The costs are too prohibitive and our technology too primitive to even consider it.[/QUOTE]

It's a process that builds over time. Why not start on it right now as we have been for a while now? Nobody is saying to spend hundreds of billions every year to colonize space right now.. The entire NASA budget is $17.6 billion yearly. A tiny chunk of that is spent yearly on research specifically for space colonization. NASA runs hundreds of different projects every year on many other things.

While NASA's goal may be a more efficient fuel-system, it doesn't mean they will put everything else aside and focus entirely on building a better fuel-system/propulsion system. They just focus more on it, but other projects also continue at same time. There are a lot of other short-term goals that can eventually help lead to space colonization and simply more exploration of space ( [url]http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/626738main_HEOMD2012Goals.pdf[/url] )

[QUOTE=bladefd]You said in numerous posts that it would be pointless to focus on colonizing space because it is 'impossible' and 'too expensive'.





It's a process that builds over time. Why not start on it right now as we have been for a while now? Nobody is saying to spend hundreds of billions every year to colonize space right now.. The entire NASA budget is $17.6 billion yearly. A tiny chunk of that is spent yearly on research specifically for space colonization. NASA runs hundreds of different projects every year on many other things.

While NASA's goal may be a more efficient fuel-system, it doesn't mean they will put everything else aside and focus entirely on building a better fuel-system/propulsion system. They just focus more on it, but other projects also continue at same time. There are a lot of other short-term goals that can eventually help lead to space colonization and simply more exploration of space ( [url]http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/626738main_HEOMD2012Goals.pdf[/url] )[/QUOTE]
Yes it is pointless to invest because it IS too expensive right now. That's why the focus is on fuel systems, not space colonization. It is also something we do NOT need, so why invest in it?
What are the reasons for space colonization? If you think those reasons are good enough, understand the requirements of actual implementation of a sizable colonization and then put that into economic and biological contexts and compare it to colonization of uninhabited places on earth. It is nonsense to even give space colonization a consideration and transitions into pure stupidity to invest in space colonization over terrestrial options.

[QUOTE=shlver]Yes it is pointless to invest because it IS too expensive right now. That's why the focus is on fuel systems, not space colonization. It is also something we do NOT need, so why invest in it?
What are the reasons for space colonization? If you think those reasons are good enough, understand the requirements of actual implementation of a sizable colonization and then put that into economic and biological contexts and compare it to colonization of uninhabited places on earth. It is nonsense to even give space colonization a consideration and transitions into pure stupidity to invest in space colonization over terrestrial options.[/QUOTE]

Like I said, nobody (not NASA or any other Scientific organization) is investing very much into it. You're making it seem like there are programs being implemented currently with present plans for human space colonization. We are talking about miniscule amounts (almost all for research that I completely support) with no current plans for going through with it.

There is a lot more money being invested for robotic space colonization though. I think robotic colonization is something that we ought to go through with on a fairly small scale. Much cheaper, plausible, and beneficial than actual human colonization.

[QUOTE=bladefd]Like I said, nobody (not NASA or any other Scientific organization) is investing very much into it. You're making it seem like there are programs being implemented currently with present plans for human space colonization. We are talking about miniscule amounts (almost all for research that I completely support) with no current plans for going through with it.[/QUOTE]
Whether or not I believe it should be funded and if I do, how much it should be funded are both completely irrelevant to my point.
[QUOTE]
There is a lot more money being invested for robotic space colonization though. I think robotic colonization is something that we ought to go through with on a fairly small scale. Much cheaper, plausible, and beneficial than actual human colonization.[/QUOTE]
Yes unmanned missions are much more economical and we should invest in those for exploration and they may pay a return in harvested resources, but manned missions(i'm using this generally) are a colossal sink in resources until we get sufficient technology to make it cost effective. And I'm not even mentioning the other risk factors concerning human health.

[QUOTE=shlver]Whether or not I believe it should be funded and if I do, how much it should be funded are both completely irrelevant to my point.

[/QUOTE]

So what is so great about the ocean and why don't you think we should commit fully to space when it can solve so many humanitarian problems we have today.

Do you know why our economy sucks right. We want to conquer the world for resources (oil); you know why so many people hate us right: we are killing them for resources (oil); do you know why more of us (americans) are going to die because we will engage in more wars right. Again, answer, resources.