

How Close Are We To Colonizing Space? - icey
http://io9.com/5428896/how-close-are-we-to-colonizing-space

======
Icterus
Not nearly as close as we are to colonizing the oceans:
<http://seasteading.org/>

~~~
joe_the_user
In other words,

We are way bleeping far away from colonizing space...

The problem that low gravity significantly accelerates aging isn't often
mentioned but it serves as a pretty decisive hindrance.

I mean, even a permanent settlement is a long way from _colonization_. We have
permanent bases on Antarctica. We aren't planning to colonize any time soon.

That part of the Jetsons will have to wait...

~~~
eru
> The problem that low gravity significantly accelerates aging isn't often
> mentioned but it serves as a pretty decisive hindrance.

Interesting. Sources?

~~~
joe_the_user
I couldn't find a really good source. It is referred to fairly often however:

[http://weboflife.nasa.gov/currentResearch/currentResearchGen...](http://weboflife.nasa.gov/currentResearch/currentResearchGeneralArchives/agingSpaceflight.htm)

 _"The lack of gravity during space flight affects living things in a variety
of ways. A number of these mimic common effects of aging."_

Puts it very nicely. Perhaps the space scientists don't want scare people
about going into space.

Also, more googling for you:

www.joanvernikos.com/uploads/space_and_aging.pdf

 _As the duration of space flight missions has increased, many other symptoms
related in particular to being away from gravity have been observed. They
include a kind of anemia due to reduced red cell mass, muscle atrophy and
reduced strength of those muscles that keep the body upright, loss of calcium
from bones, reduced bone density and strength, reduced calcium absorption from
the gut, disturbed sleep and a depressed immune system. These are all normal
body function adaptations that occur when away from gravity. Degradation of
body functions no longer needed in space is the normal adaptation to living
away from gravity._

\-- Simulates the effects of aging...

~~~
daniel-cussen
_As the duration of space flight missions has increased, many other symptoms
related in particular to being away from gravity have been observed. They
include a kind of anemia due to reduced red cell mass, muscle atrophy and
reduced strength of those muscles that keep the body upright, loss of calcium
from bones, reduced bone density and strength, reduced calcium absorption from
the gut, disturbed sleep and a depressed immune system. These are all normal
body function adaptations that occur when away from gravity. Degradation of
body functions no longer needed in space is the normal adaptation to living
away from gravity._

OK, these are pretty bad, but they're not literally cancer. My space-age
dreams live on.

~~~
joe_the_user
Hmm,

With the things are going, you're more like to download yourself to a computer
and then go into orbit than human society is to put biological human very far
into space.

~~~
berntb
How about working out in centrifuges for one hour a day at ... 0.5 G? (2001,
here we come!)

This should be testable on Earth with people kept in bed 23 h/day and mild
exercise. (It is like quite a few coding people's lifestyle.)

------
stcredzero
We could've done it with 1970's technology. The primary hurdle is economic.
(Fast Mars missions would've been feasible with Project Orion's nuclear
propulsion. Background radiation would be a lot worse now, however.)

~~~
berntb
Since it seems we could have had viable colonies outside the atmosphere by
now, this should have implications for Fermi's Paradox.

If Fermi's Paradox comes from a limiting factor "removing" civilizations (a
physics experiment, etc), it should need to destroy a whole solar system and
not only a planet. Otherwise it would only remove the fraction of
civilizations that didn't develop an Orion before that experiment.

IIRC, NASA killed Orion politically? They might have exterminated humanity --
for job security...

~~~
hugh_
I'm guessing that civilizations on some other planets probably have a much
easier time of colonizing space than we do. We have the misfortune of finding
ourselves in the only vaguely-habitable rock in our own solar system, but some
other systems must have multiple habitable planets, even multiple life-
supporting ones.

Imagine if the moon had been several times bigger -- it would have an
atmosphere, and thanks to panspermia might even have picked up enough life
from Earth to give it a breathable atmosphere. The Apollo Project would have
immediately been followed by a project to kill and eat the local wildlife to
see what it tastes like. Or suppose we'd evolved on a moon of a Jupiter-like
planet in the habitable zone -- there'd be a whole bunch of other equally
habitable moons just a short flight away.

Instead we're stuck on a big rock, looking at a bunch of other rocks which are
fairly useless to us. Sigh.

~~~
coderdude
I'm fuzzy on this so I may be wrong, but wouldn't the moon require a metal
core to create a magnetic field to hold the atmosphere (or protect it from
being bombarded by radiation)?

~~~
hugh_
Quite likely, yes.

------
dennisgorelik
Could anybody explain to me why would we need to colonize Mars (or even Moon)
if we still have virtually empty Antarctica and near-empty Siberia?

~~~
wooster
It reduces the risk of total species annihilation.

~~~
lliiffee
I wonder how much it does. Seems to me the greatest risk is global
thermonuclear war. If we are determined enough to nuke ourselves our of
existence here, couldn't we pretty easily send a bunch of bombs mars' way,
too?

~~~
wooster
There are more risks than nuclear war. For example, asteroid impacts,
pandemics, ecological disasters, etc.

Even in the case of nuclear war, it's much easier to detect and destroy an
incoming nuke from another planet than it is to hit one that makes its transit
in 5 minutes. Especially if information about the nuke is transmitted at the
same time as the nuke.

Also, once we make that first "leap across the black" to colonizing another
planet, theoretically the next, further leap, will be easier/less daunting.

------
elblanco
20 years. We're always 20 years away.

