If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   Scientists say there can be habitable moons outside our solar system: about four trillion of them. Chance of ET phoning Earth are increasing   (io9.com) divider line 61
    More: Cool, planetary habitability, Earth, Galilean moons, solar system, aliens, magnetosphere, space radiation, Universe Today  
•       •       •

1432 clicks; posted to Geek » on 27 Sep 2013 at 9:57 AM (43 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



61 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-27 10:19:21 PM

RedVentrue: Lt. Cheese Weasel: RedVentrue: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Prophet of Loss: RedVentrue: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Space is infinite.  4 trillion is a finite number.  This does not compute.

And we're never leaving this anthill anyway.

If space is expanding, then it can't be infinite.

Well the current theory is that its expanding. Lets talk again 10 years.

Well if there is a point where 'space' ends, what's on the other side? Anyone who says Sha'Ka'Ree and God gets a punch in the dick.

Maybe it doesn't just end. Maybe it just graduall falls apart. Maybe as you get closer to the boundary area, space breaks down to the point where you can't actually reach the perimeter, like the event horizon of a black hole.

So, in the absence of something, there is nothing. But the concept of nothing is now suspect. All of this has to be in a container. I want to talk to the planning comission.

It is what it is, and I'm not saying that that's what it is, only that it's one possibility. Unless we could get there and experience it for ourselves, we can only speculate. Anyone who tells you different is either lying, or religious, and that includes the scientists.


Very few have, IMO, have come close to being qualified to answer the question. Sagan, Einstein, and ?
 
2013-09-27 10:30:18 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: RedVentrue: Lt. Cheese Weasel: RedVentrue: An 80% or whatever pandemic won't fix the problem, as in 100 - 200 years we'll be right back in the same predicament. What will fix the problem is to raise the 3rd world countries to 1st world status. Only then will population growth be contained.

Well, as long as illiterate monkeys fornicate in the name of some sky wizard, it's a losing proposition.  Religion is an anchor and a cancer.

Greed, tribal thought, and screwing over ones neighbor for fun and profit, are as great a threat to humanity's future. The problem is not so much with religion, as with the psychopaths that have control of religion. The same could be said of the banking system, and government.

Hence, my point.  One unifying human species agenda. Not there. We know just enough to be dangerous.


If there were one unifying human agenda, it would be a horrifying monstrosity.

First would come the need for a global control system to make sure everyone follows the rules.

Then there would have to be an evolving and increasingly demanding system of punishment and control for those who can't or won't follow the rules.

After the power hungry gain control, then would be the hellish environment everyone would have to live under because power corrupts.

You want to live under a one world tyranny? I'm glad that we all can't get along all the time.
 
2013-09-27 10:33:27 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: RedVentrue: Lt. Cheese Weasel: RedVentrue: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Prophet of Loss: RedVentrue: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Space is infinite.  4 trillion is a finite number.  This does not compute.

And we're never leaving this anthill anyway.

If space is expanding, then it can't be infinite.

Well the current theory is that its expanding. Lets talk again 10 years.

Well if there is a point where 'space' ends, what's on the other side? Anyone who says Sha'Ka'Ree and God gets a punch in the dick.

Maybe it doesn't just end. Maybe it just graduall falls apart. Maybe as you get closer to the boundary area, space breaks down to the point where you can't actually reach the perimeter, like the event horizon of a black hole.

So, in the absence of something, there is nothing. But the concept of nothing is now suspect. All of this has to be in a container. I want to talk to the planning comission.

It is what it is, and I'm not saying that that's what it is, only that it's one possibility. Unless we could get there and experience it for ourselves, we can only speculate. Anyone who tells you different is either lying, or religious, and that includes the scientists.

Very few have, IMO, have come close to being qualified to answer the question. Sagan, Einstein, and ?


I don't think anyone living or dead has even been able to properly grasp the issue. Like you said. We aren't smart enough.
 
2013-09-27 10:43:54 PM

RedVentrue: Hence, my point. One unifying human species agenda. Not there. We know just enough to be dangerous.

If there were one unifying human agenda, it would be a horrifying monstrosity.


Ah you miss my point, a 'unifying agenda' is one in which all, without fail understand it, accept it, and it is not ' tryanny'. It simply 'is'. Without any 'control'.  Everyone has the same ephiphany, all at once.  Lofty and screwy I know, but it is what I think.
 
2013-09-27 11:00:15 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: RedVentrue: Hence, my point. One unifying human species agenda. Not there. We know just enough to be dangerous.

If there were one unifying human agenda, it would be a horrifying monstrosity.

Ah you miss my point, a 'unifying agenda' is one in which all, without fail understand it, accept it, and it is not ' tryanny'. It simply 'is'. Without any 'control'.  Everyone has the same ephiphany, all at once.  Lofty and screwy I know, but it is what I think.


HIVE MIND. We actually may be approaching that. Are you familiar with the Singularity?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Singularity
 
2013-09-27 11:55:17 PM

RedVentrue: An 80% or whatever pandemic won't fix the problem, as in 100 - 200 years we'll be right back in the same predicament. What will fix the problem is to raise the 3rd world countries to 1st world status. Only then will population growth be contained.


The problem is that a first world lifestyle tends to use a lot more resources than a third world one, so in the short term it makes the problem worse in terms of energy, water, and food usage. The trick is to make sure that a first world lifestyle is made more sustainable at the same time we are raising up the third world.
 
2013-09-28 12:16:12 AM

Mad_Radhu: RedVentrue: An 80% or whatever pandemic won't fix the problem, as in 100 - 200 years we'll be right back in the same predicament. What will fix the problem is to raise the 3rd world countries to 1st world status. Only then will population growth be contained.

The problem is that a first world lifestyle tends to use a lot more resources than a third world one, so in the short term it makes the problem worse in terms of energy, water, and food usage. The trick is to make sure that a first world lifestyle is made more sustainable at the same time we are raising up the third world.


I have trouble buying that line of reasoning. I think more energy, water, and food resources are wasted and squandered by people in third world countries by lack of management, education and infrastructure. If these people had something other than a hand to mouth existence, then they would have something else to do rather than forcing women to have 30 children in the hope that 5 - 10 will survive.
 
2013-09-28 02:12:01 AM

RedVentrue: Mad_Radhu: RedVentrue: An 80% or whatever pandemic won't fix the problem, as in 100 - 200 years we'll be right back in the same predicament. What will fix the problem is to raise the 3rd world countries to 1st world status. Only then will population growth be contained.

The problem is that a first world lifestyle tends to use a lot more resources than a third world one, so in the short term it makes the problem worse in terms of energy, water, and food usage. The trick is to make sure that a first world lifestyle is made more sustainable at the same time we are raising up the third world.

I have trouble buying that line of reasoning. I think more energy, water, and food resources are wasted and squandered by people in third world countries by lack of management, education and infrastructure. If these people had something other than a hand to mouth existence, then they would have something else to do rather than forcing women to have 30 children in the hope that 5 - 10 will survive.


The number I have heard quoted is that an American consumes 53 times more goods and services than someone in China, which means a lot more resources are used (especially considering how disposable American living is compared to other parts of the world). There has to be a combination of reducing birth rates in the developing world while also reducing the impact of the developed world, otherwise the numbers on the calculator won't make a happy face when it comes to the planet's carrying capacity.

The only thing that could conceivably change the calculus would be a disruptive leap forward in power generation. For example, an engineering breakthrough that suddenly makes fusion reactors workable, would increase the amount of energy available to humanity by an order of magnitude, which suddenly makes a lot of hard things doable, like creating massive desalination plants to get rid of water shortages and making deserts arable.
 
2013-09-28 08:35:42 AM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Prophet of Loss: RedVentrue: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Space is infinite.  4 trillion is a finite number.  This does not compute.

And we're never leaving this anthill anyway.

If space is expanding, then it can't be infinite.

Well the current theory is that its expanding. Lets talk again 10 years.

Well if there is a point where 'space' ends, what's on the other side? Anyone who says Sha'Ka'Ree and God gets a punch in the dick.


We could all live in a shell of undetectable Dark Matter. We won't really know until we encountered it ... or don't.
 
2013-09-28 01:03:52 PM
Article fails to explain WTF difference it makes, as there is no way to get to any of these moons at the moment.  I doubt we will find a way to get to them before we extinguish ourselves.
 
2013-09-28 03:15:05 PM

Mad_Radhu: The only thing that could conceivably change the calculus would be a disruptive leap forward in power generation. For example, an engineering breakthrough that suddenly makes fusion reactors workable, would increase the amount of energy available to humanity by an order of magnitude, which suddenly makes a lot of hard things doable, like creating massive desalination plants to get rid of water shortages and making deserts arable.


I agree with the principle, but I think that humans could do much more to improve the lot of humanity with the resources we currently have.
 
Displayed 11 of 61 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report