Colonizing Space: How, When And Why?

[sigurdV]

What is our situation in a Galactive Perspective?

 

And what has our Galaxy to do with our solar system?

 

Isnt our Galaxy an environment we can ignore?

 

Cant we rest snug and content here on Earth?

 

Some questions id like to see handled with care... Shoot!

[Moontanman]

What is our situation in a Galactive Perspective?

 

We are part of our galaxy, we live on a planet that orbits a yellow dwarf star, not a completely average star, our sun is a bit unusual in it's high metal content, low UV output and stability, but in many way's it is not unusual at all.

 

And what has our Galaxy to do with our solar system?

 

Our solar system orbits around the center of the Milky Way galaxy, we are part of the galaxy.

 

Isnt our Galaxy an environment we can ignore?

 

No, in fact the galaxy has tremendous influence on our planet and conditions in our galaxy could eliminate life on earth easily if we were too close to the center or too close to a unstable star, the list is long but we are no doubt influenced by the galaxy.

 

Cant we rest snug and content here on Earth?

 

No, not long term and possibly not short term either, the earth is a limited environment, we can easily use up the resources here and extinguish our selves and maybe life on earth in general. The sun is slowly getting brighter, by some estimates in another 500,000,000 years the earth might be uninhabitable due to this increase in solar radiation and then too we know that the sun will expand and destroy the earth eventually.

 

Some questions id like to see handled with care... Shoot!

 

you got it...

[Moontanman]

I would like to note that i think the colonization of planets will be the less taken option. planets and their indigenous life forms could cause problems we wouldn't need and the gravity wells of planets will be very expensive to crawl out of regularly. i think free orbiting colonies are more likely. Carbon nano tube type fibers could be used to make torus shaped colonies, miles in diameter, like endless suspension bridges, rotate them and inside you have gravity and a huge space for a ecosystem. Moving it around in low energy orbits to take advantage of natural resources, once a colony was built and independent building a new colony would be the main business of the colony as it traveled around a star system. gathering resources to build more and better ones could bring about a growth that would expand at a high rate if not exponentially.

[sigurdV]

Hi! A splendid jab! Right in the bulls eye of the target.

 

I think we, in here should present maps and visualisations of our Galaxy:

Measure distances and masses.

Sort of getting the perspective of the so called

"Galactive Perspective".

 

Ive got no such expertise...ehrmmm... Can i expect you to contribute?

While our future target eventually is described i will start preliminary work here on Earth:

 

Darwin said that given enough time a species will show individual variation due to random causes (what we today call "mutations")

and that the best adapted to environmental change will survive.

 

The key word here is "environmental change"

Either the environment itself changes like when seawater gets saltier

or one or more individuals enters a new environment!

 

Darwins theory applies to both situations and as he obviously intended to explain why fish get lungs and legs, why birds get wings etc, his theory explains why ecological niches get filled.

 

I dont think I add much to the theory when I assume that the process will continue

until all available ecological niches are filled!

 

The key word here is "available".

In order to enter some new territory (Like Space) a species may have to acquire remarkable skills, skills like Mathemathics and Engineering...in short

 

"Civilisation".

 

In short: Humans are not unique, we are not far from the norm!

 

I can of course not prove this, what I can do is to remind the reader of the painful process

 

of removing the Earth

from the glorious center of the Universe

to an insignificant spot

situated close to the rim of our Galaxy,

situated in an insignificant spot in a Galactic Cluster,

situated in ...

[maddog]

... I think we should map and visualise our Galaxy:

Measure distances and masses.

Sort of getting the perspective of the so called

"Galactive Perspective".

Yes, this sort of study is going around the globe at many Astronomical research locations.

For example, using radio telescopes - they are mapping the core of our galaxy.

 

maddog

[sigurdV]

1 I would like to note that i think the colonization of planets will be the less taken option. planets and their indigenous life forms could cause problems we wouldn't need and the gravity wells of planets will be very expensive to crawl out of regularly. i think free orbiting colonies are more likely.

 

2 Carbon nano tube type fibers could be used to make torus shaped colonies, miles in diameter, like endless suspension bridges, rotate them and inside you have gravity and a huge space for a ecosystem. Moving it around in low energy orbits to take advantage of natural resources,

 

3 once a colony was built and independent, building a new colony would be the main business of the colony as it traveled around a star system. gathering resources to build more and better ones could bring about a growth that would expand at a high rate if not exponentially.

 

I have only a few minor remarks to your picture.

 

1 "Colonies"... I prefere to think of them as Space Cities, and I imagine them to be Globes.

 

2 Travel time was long and I expect the city to exploit easily accessed resources,

so the first stop is the Asteroid Belt.(If any)

 

3 One city stays in the system and a copy travels to the next stop.

Of course most citizens wont give up their lifestyle and settle on planets.

 

Was there no trouble on the road?

 

Are we in the Centauri System?

How long time did it take?

Is our home "territory" a Sphere,

with 4 light years radius?

 

Can we live in and defend it?

And why is the colony a sphere?

 

We packed materials for the copy

in case we find no asteroid belt.

And our walls, and inner walls are thick.

[sigurdV]

Yes, this sort of study is going around the globe at many Astronomical research locations.

For example, using radio telescopes - they are mapping the core of our galaxy.

 

maddog

Hello!

I hereby take the opportunity to applaud their efforts!

And I welcome you to this thread :)

(So I edited it a little, inviting ppl to post in here.)

 

Yeah! Thats how the existence of the Black Hole in the Galactic center was proved, is it named yet? (A melody sneaks out from my subconscious: Our House, in the middle of the street... Im probably supposed to turn it into... Our Hole, in the Center where we meet.)

Of course we didnt see it but we could watch the dancing stars close to it... Sigh I wish for some pictures in here ;)

 

The stellar disk of the Milky Way galaxy is approximately 100,000 light-years (30 kiloparsecs, 9×1017 km) in diameter, and is considered to be, on average, about 1,000 ly (0.3 kpc) thick.[1] It is estimated to contain at least 100 billion stars[18] and possibly up to 400 billion stars.[19] The exact figure depends on the number of very low-mass, or dwarf stars, which are hard to detect, especially at distance of more than 300 ly (90 pc) from the Sun. Hence, current estimates of the total number remain highly uncertain, though it is often speculated to be around 250 billion.[citation needed] This can be compared to the one trillion (1012) stars of the neighboring Andromeda Galaxy.[20]

The disk of stars in the Milky Way does not have a sharp edge beyond which there are no stars. Rather, the concentration of stars drops smoothly with distance from the center of the galaxy. Beyond a radius of roughly 40,000 ly (12 kpc), the number of stars per cubic parsec drops much faster with radius,[21] for reasons that are not understood. Recent[when?] estimates give the galaxy a population of at least 50 billion planets, 10 billion of which could be located in the habitable zone of their parent star.[22][23] New data[when?] suggests there may be up to twice as many free-floating planets in the Milky Way as there are stars.[24] In 2011, new evidence obtained via gravitational microlensing indicated an average of at least one bound planet per star in the Milky Way, with Earth-sized planets being more numerous than gas giants.[14]

 

 

A 360-degree photographic panorama of the Milky Way showing our edge-on view of the galaxy.

Filling the place between the stars within and around the stellar disk is a disk of gas called the interstellar medium. The disk of gas has at least a comparable extent in radius to the stars,[25] while the thickness of the gas layer ranges from hundreds of light years for the colder gas to thousands of light years for warmer gas.[26][27]

As a guide to the relative physical scale of the Milky Way, if it were reduced to 100 meters (110 yd) in diameter, the Solar System, including the hypothesized Oort cloud, would be no more than 1 millimeter (0.039 in) in width, or a grain of sand in a football field.

The Galactic Halo extends outward, but is limited in size by the orbits of two Milky Way satellites, the Large and the Small Magellanic Clouds, whose perigalacticon is at about 180,000 ly (55 kpc).[28] At this distance or beyond, the orbits of most halo objects would be disrupted by the Magellanic Clouds, and the objects would likely be ejected from the vicinity of the Milky Way.

[Moontanman]

I have only a few minor remarks to your picture.

 

1 "Colonies"... I prefere to think of them as Space Cities, and I imagine them to be Globes.

 

Why globes?

 

2 Travel time was long and I expect the city to exploit easily accessed resources,

so the first stop is the Asteroid Belt.(If any)

 

We'd have to build them here and it's doubtful we could, with anything close to current technology, go to another star, i was talking about low energy orbit inside our own solar system. I would expect many centuries of building such "cities" in our own solar system before we moved out and decided to colonize the galaxy.

 

3 One city stays in the system and a copy travels to the next stop.

Of course most citizens wont give up their lifestyle and settle on planets.

 

I am sure there would be thousands if not millions of "cities" in our own solar system, at some point they might begin to take long leaps outside our solar system.

 

Was there no trouble on the road?

 

What?

 

Are we in the Centauri System?

 

You jumping the gun a little bit here.

 

How long time did it take?

 

Estimates of the time it would take to colonize our entire galaxy vary depending on the speeds we are capable of but even at speeds of just a percent or so of the speed of light would allow us to colonize the entire galaxy in a few million years.

 

Is our home "territory" a Sphere,

with 4 light years radius?

 

 

What?

 

Can we live in and defend it?

 

Defend against what?

 

And why is the colony a sphere?

 

You said it was

 

We packed materials for the copy

in case we find no asteroid belt.

And our walls, and inner walls are thick.

 

More mass makes it harder to travel from one star to another, probes would be sent ahead to check for the proper materials, no reason to carry anymore than absolutely necessary...

[sigurdV]

Yippeee! Work! Answering solid questions! This is LIVING!

 

1 Why globes?

2 We'd have to build them here and it's doubtful we could, with anything close to current technology, go to another star, i was talking about low energy orbit inside our own solar system. I would expect many centuries of building such "cities" in our own solar system before we moved out and decided to colonize the galaxy.

3 I am sure there would be thousands if not millions of "cities" in our own solar system, at some point they might begin to take long leaps outside our solar system.

4 Wha

5 You jumping the gun a little bit here.

6 Estimates of the time it would take to colonize our entire galaxy vary depending on the speeds we are capable of but even at speeds of just a percent or so of the speed of light would allow us to colonize the entire galaxy in a few million years.

7 What?

8 Defend against what?

9 You said it was

10 More mass makes it harder to travel from one star to another, probes would be sent ahead to check for the proper materials, no reason to carry anymore than absolutely necessary...

 

 

1 Several reasons: Its economical you get the most space for your walls. And,Space is dangerous you want protection from meteorites and radiation...The city has several layers of skin! And it is supposed to carry lots of people and is supposed to carry factories,recreation and mercantile areas, hydroponic farms and gardens.

We are talking about a CITY in Space. With people happily staying there!

 

2 You hit the nail on the head: We design them with our Solar System in mind, we immediately use it/them for mining the system for resources. Both for Earth and the Cities! When we expand further out than the Oorth cloud the City concept has been shown to work!

 

And we construct the first Interstellar City!

 

3 One of our tasks is to analyze your question, my estimate is 100.

 

4 I dont expect meeting Aliens yet, but space is untravelled territory.

 

5 Yes... but remember im Architect not Engineer

 

6 Here is the problem: The probability is, as I see it: We will meet resistance!

 

7 When The interstellar City reaches the Centauri system our Home Space is the globe generated by the radius from Sun to Centauri.

 

8 Any other expanding Civilisation.

 

9 Yes, something wrong in the concept?

 

10 I agree:The Interstellar City can launche rockets (and Sail ships).

Still it needs lots of resources.

And sending an Armada seems wiser...

[Moontanman]

Yippeee! Work! Answering solid questions! This is LIVING!

 

 

 

 

1 Several reasons: Its economical you get the most space for your walls. And,Space is dangerous you want protection from meteorites and radiation...The city has several layers of skin! And it is supposed to carry lots of people and is supposed to carry factories,recreation and mercantile areas, hydroponic farms and gardens.

We are talking about a CITY in Space. With people happily staying there!

 

None the less why a sphere? Other shapes like a torus would be easier to generate artificial gravity in and would still have the protections you mentioned as well as the capabilities.

 

 

 

 

3 One of our tasks is to analyze your question, my estimate is 100.

 

100 what?

 

6 Here is the problem: The probability is, as I see it: We will meet resistance!

 

Resistance is futile...

 

7 When The interstellar City reaches the Centauri system our Home Space is the globe generated by the radius from Sun to Centauri.

 

Ummm, no...

 

8 Any other expanding Civilisation.

 

Why would we want to fight them? Resources in the galaxy are very much close to unlimited, in the terms of our civilization they are unlimited. Several "species" could share the resources in our own solar system for millions of years, fighting over something there is too much of to use is illogical. It would be like two men drowning and fighting over how much water they had...

 

 

9 Yes, something wrong in the concept?

 

A sphere would be difficult to make artificial gravity in, the inner surface would be subject to varying gravity depending on how far away from the equator you are, it's inefficient to hold it together, parts of it would be subject to huge strains and other parts would be weightless.

 

10 I agree:The Interstellar City can launche rockets (and Sail ships).

Still it needs lots of resources.

And sending an Armada seems wiser...

 

Sending an armada is a waste of time and energy.

[sigurdV]

http://www.nas.nasa.gov/About/Education/SpaceSettlement/75SummerStudy/Table_of_Contents1.html

 

1 The globe is spinning to generate artificial gravity,the poles and the middle axis are low gravity areas useful in many ways, medicine,certain industry processes, recreational etc etc . If we dont find any better use for an area we use it for storage.

 

OBS im not dead against using the torus or disk shapes i only think a globe is the most economical if all inside space can be used for some purpose! Am I wrong there?

 

The torus possibly has disadvantages: where is the area of very high gravity where we can have/evolve life suited for work on massive planets? In the sphere its the outest layer which is a good storage layer as well... You can enlarge the torus but is it economical compared to the globe? And where is the low gravity areas for hospital and other use?

 

And how safe is the torus in a meteorite rain, if you use sealing off methods you risk isolation...in the globe theres always free access to everywhere through the center axis. Easy both to seal and rescue ppl in damaged areas. Its economy and practicality that should guide us...

 

Why Not A Globe?

 

3 I dont think more cities is needed to begin the work on the interstellar globe.(just guessing)

 

6 u mean them resisting us or we them?

 

Come on man, isnt it time to brush off and introduce Drakes Equation in here?

Or do you seriously think were alone in our galaxy?

My question is not IF we meet them: it is WHEN WHERE AND HOW!?

Are we armed only with good intentions?

Are we motivated to enquire into the when and the where??

 

To give an example: Is it safer to expand outwards to the rim than inwards to the center?

 

Shall we look upon it as a game?

 

We are aware of our own starting situation,

on the board there is an unknown amount of players

with situations yet unknown to us...

 

What is our strategy?

What must we do to survive the game?

Can we win?

 

7 Am i not the guide here?

I simply define our first Very Large Territory to defend

as our Home Territory.

 

I began this tour with the idea of mapping so...

How many home territories are there space for on our way to the Galactic Center?

And on our way to the rim?

And how many in the whole galaxy?

 

8 Im not saying we should fight them...

All Im saying is that our damned DUTY is to defend ourselves IF attacked!

And that we should ensure that we will defeat them IF we are attacked.

Can YOU guarantee they will not exist nor attack if they do??

 

9 You are introducing engineering matters...they can wait.

Im sure them engineers can work out the optimal size and shape for the Space City

 

10 Tricked!

 

I didnt define what was meant by an Armada...

Now i will surely define it so it is NOT a waste of time NOR energy!

 

Well... thats that. The serve is yours!

[Moontanman]

1 The globe is spinning to generate artificial gravity,the poles and the middle axis are low gravity areas useful in many ways, medicine,certain industry processes, recreational etc etc . If we dont find any better use for an area we use it for storage.

 

Storage? Really? A torus has a hub with zero G as well...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_habitat

 

OBS im not dead against using the torus or disk shapes i only think a globe is the most economical if all inside space can be used for some purpose! Am I wrong there?

 

yes, you are wrong, a torus has no less usable space

 

The torus possibly has disadvantages: where is the area of very high gravity where we can have/evolve life suited for work on massive planets?

 

Where is it in a sphere and why have it?

 

In the sphere its the outest layer which is a good storage layer as well...

 

So is a torus or cylinder.

 

You can enlarge the torus but is it economical compared to the globe?

 

How do you enlarge a sphere? you can attach several tori together.

 

 

And where is the low gravity areas for hospital and other use?

 

If they are needed at the hub...

 

And how safe is the torus in a meteorite rain, if you use sealing off methods you risk isolation...

 

Just as safe if not safer than a sphere.

 

 

in the globe theres always free access to everywhere through the center axis. Easy both to seal and rescue ppl in damaged areas.

 

So too in a torus

 

Its economy and practicality that should guide us...

 

Exactly

 

Why Not A Globe?

 

3 I dont think more cities is needed to begin the work on the interstellar globe.(just guessing)

 

Think again, why go interstellar if you don't have to?

 

6 u mean them resisting us or we them?

 

either one is silly

 

Come on man, isnt it time to brush off and introduce Drakes Equation in here?

Or do you seriously think were alone in our galaxy?

 

 

I have no idea

 

 

My question is not IF we meet them: it is WHEN WHERE AND HOW!?

Are we armed only with good intentions?

Are we motivated to enquire into the when and the where??

 

Why would they be hostile?

 

To give an example: Is it safer to expand outwards to the rim than inwards to the center?

 

The center is dangerous place, full of high energy phenomena.

 

Shall we look upon it as a game?

 

only if the rules conform to reality

 

We are aware of our own starting situation,

on the board there is an unknown amount of players

with situations yet unknown to us...

 

Why assume hostility, there is no reason for it or to assume it.

 

What is our strategy?

What must we do to survive the game?

Can we win?

 

Again why compete at all?

 

7 Am i not the guide here?

I simply define our first Very Large Territory to defend

as our Home Territory.

 

Far too much Star Trek and Star wars, such scenarios are only applicable if FTL is possible and easy.

 

 

I began this tour with the idea of mapping so...

How many home territories are there space for on our way to the Galactic Center?

And on our way to the rim?

And how many in the whole galaxy?

 

meaningless assertion in the scope and context of the entire galaxy.

 

8 Im not saying we should fight them...

All Im saying is that our damned DUTY is to defend ourselves IF attacked!

And that we should ensure that we will defeat them IF we are attacked.

Can YOU guarantee they will not exist nor attack if they do??

 

Again interstellar war is not a supportable scenario

[sigurdV]

see #12

 

 

I think our format is ok for ourselves, but readers will have to search for the roots of our statements, so i decided to try presenting the discussion in the format of a conversation: See next entry.I suppose my own view is empasised and I want you to edit it so your views are not underexposed...

I think readers might find a balanced account of our conversating interesting :)

[sigurdV]

A summary.

 

Moontanman said:I would like to note that i think the colonization of planets will be the less taken option. planets and their indigenous life forms could cause problems we wouldn't need and the gravity wells of planets will be very expensive to crawl out of regularly. i think free orbiting colonies are more likely.

 

sV said: "Colonies"... I prefere to think of them as "Space Cities", and I imagine them to be Globes.

They are spinning to generate artificial gravity,the poles and the middle axis are low gravity areas useful in many ways, medicine,certain industry processes, recreational etc etc . If we dont find any better use for an area we use it for storage.

 

Moontanman said: Storage? Really? A torus has a hub with zero G as well... Why globes? We'd have to build them here and it's doubtful we could, with anything close to current technology, go to another star, i was talking about low energy orbit inside our own solar system. I would expect many centuries of building such "cities" in our own solar system before we moved out and decided to colonize the galaxy.

I am sure there would be thousands if not millions of "cities" in our own solar system, at some point they might begin to take long leaps outside our solar system.

 

sV said: One of our tasks is to analyze that situation. I dont think more than a hundred cities is needed to begin the work on the "Interstellar Space City". The torus has disadvantages: where is the area of very high gravity

 

Moontanman said:Where is it in a sphere and why have it?

 

sV said:Its an expansion at the equator area.

 

Moontanman said:How do you enlarge a sphere? you can attach several tori together

 

sV said: If you can afford it, the way to save money is to build an outer enclosure...

In the Space City theres always free access to the inside through the center axis.

It is easy both to reach and rescue ppl in damaged areas.

 

Moontanman said:So too in a torus or cylinder.

 

sV said: How do you reach your "hub" from the perimeter?

If by a diameter then your "torus" is no longer a torus.

And how safe is it in a "Meteorite Rain"?

 

Moontanman said:Just as safe if not safer than a sphere.

 

sV said: Are you joking? Dont you realise that a torus and a sphere

with the same volume has surfaces of different size?

The torus will have to repair more hits than the globe, and you call that safer??

 

Moontanman said:Think again, why go interstellar if you don't have to?

 

sV says:Dont we have to?

[Moontanman]

SigurdV, please use the quote feature, it makes it much easier to have a discussion, your long rants filled with concepts that should be in science fantasy instead of a real discussion is making it difficult to converse with you as well. Go back, edit your message with quote tags and I'll try to explain why many of your concepts simply do not hold any weight.

[sigurdV]

SigurdV, please use the quote feature, it makes it much easier to have a discussion, your long rants filled with concepts that should be in science fantasy instead of a real discussion is making it difficult to converse with you as well. Go back, edit your message with quote tags and I'll try to explain why many of your concepts simply do not hold any weight.

I take it you mean in #14? Ill see what can be done.

[sigurdV]

SigurdV, please use the quote feature, it makes it much easier to have a discussion, your long rants filled with concepts that should be in science fantasy instead of a real discussion is making it difficult to converse with you as well. Go back, edit your message with quote tags and I'll try to explain why many of your concepts simply do not hold any weight.

 

I sincerely want you to explain things, but I refuse to do any more work on the summary!

Either you do something with it, or you just leave it. It was an attempt to clarify things.