Moontanman

Mike, none of the "science" you have mentioned have anything to do with a hierarchy of an intelligence. And one more time why would you assume that individuals in a super civilization would be any more than just alien versions of us? Are you going to mention Noetic Science next?

Another things that should be mentioned, and any military commander would know this, command of the high ground is of paramount importance. Space is the ultimate high ground, an iron nickel asteroid a 100 meters in diameter would be impossible to stop and destroy it's target with no radiation. Nudging such a body into an intercept orbit with Earth, yes a particular spot on the Earth would not be difficult to do and impossible to prove who if anyone did it... I know somewhere in the pentagon this thought is better than viagra to some...

Please define what would be a step above us, it's bad enough to you continue to use the word hierarchy as though we all know what you are talking about. From my point of view no such hierarchy exists and you are moving the goalposts around at light speed. Goddamn particle Mike, it was originally called the goddamn particle. Please show some historical artifacts that are evidence of something "supernatural" and human testimony, especially hearsay testimony is worthless. Next you seem to be partial to the old god of the gaps idea which is just silly. What "fueled" the big bang is unknown possibly forever unknown but your speculation is no better than some brobdingnagian creature that eats dark matter and excretes universes and doesn't know it's own shit. The rest of this is just wishful speculation, as I have said earlier the power of a civilization says nothing about the individuals in it. Why do you continue to assume there is something called god? Have you any evidence other than a desire? And taking George Smoot's comments to mean what you want us to see is more than a bit dishonest..

Mike, so many other animals do all the things you assert making a list would be long and tedious... And by the way, you seem to be asserting that the supernatural is a given when in fact it is nothing but baseless claims..

As a primary motivation? What was the primary motivation for Columbus to sail to China? He failed and still succeeded. Serendipity is often a good thing, what we don't know can and often leads to technology we didn't even imagine. Mars as I have said is not inhabitable Antarctica is far more easily colonised. We already know asteroids contain huge amounts of useful elements in far greater concentration than the Earth's crust.. And again I say that the amount spent a year on ways to wipe out our population equals the amount spent in the last 50 years on space exploration. Economy has little to do with it, very little hardware must be lifted from Earth. All businesses must spend money to make money, manufacturing plants don't just jump out of the ground. All those things can be dealt with, in fact the very nature of rotating colonies requires those things be dealt with. Water storage tanks protect from radiation, debris can either be dealt with by lasers or the colony can be moved just enough to avoid impact. Essential equipment would either be built on site, what would be so complex that spare parts couldn't be made via 3D printing or simply carried along. Essential parts that couldn't be made on site would be carried by any intelligent colonists..

I thank everyone who looked into this, since Przybylski's Star appears to be unique in it's transuranium elemental content, no other such star has been detected I thought investigation was warranted. While the video did indeed include aliens as a possible source I only included it for informational purposes not to assert "aliens" my bad, I apologise....

Are you suggesting that elements heavier than uranium can the the decay kay products of lighter atoms?

Unless the supernova occurred quite recently, and mean a few centuries, those isotopes should have decayed, some of them have half lives of hours. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Przybylski%27s_Star

I agree,the idea of aliens dumping planetary masses of these elements in a star is difficult to understand but plutonium is not the only element detected. One at least has a half life so small the entire volume of the Earth is thought to contain less than the volume of a sugar cube at any one time. It's a mystery that, to me at least, would trigger research on a large scale. It's almost like finding an object on the moon shaped like a perfect rendition of human riding a horse statue. No way it could just be ignored. The more I look into it the stranger it becomes, but I can find little to no discussion of this star. This Star is unique in that no other star has been found with transuranic elements in it's atmosphere not to mention the low levels of metals like iron...

It's so frustrating to post something you are intensely interested in and have either no replies or no serious replies. Seriously guys what gives?

Private industry is putting a huge amount of money into space exploration already. There is indeed a point before which space travel is very expensive but there is also a point where it becomes very profitable and cheap. Elon Musk sees the benefits and doing something about it. No, space colony would by definition have to be self sufficient, A base or outpost would not. Radiation is easily shielded against by the outer skin being used as water tanks, relatively thin tanks of water protect us from radiation and have to double capacity of storing fuel. Objects big enough to be dangerous can be vaporised by lasers before the hit, the colony can move out of the way of really large objects. All essential equipment would be built on site or by nearby colonies specializing in such things. A torus colony 100 miles in it's major diameter and 20 miles in it's minor diameter, build like a continuous suspension bridge, lighted on the inside, of by fusion if we manage to develop controlled fusion, could house thousands of people and grow their own food. I see colonies specializing in food stuffs or mechanical parts, or even water extraction. If we manage to control fusion the entire galaxy is our oyster, deep gravity wells of stars and planets will be useless and ignored. Other than fusion we already have the technology to do this, the trojan asteroids of Jupiter seem like the best, easily exploited place to find those resources. BYW we know the composition of asteroids. colonies would not be required to be self sufficient. Volatiles, if need be, could be obtained by simply visiting a small ice body. New colonies could be made by visiting kuiper belt objects or oort cloud objects. In fact if the population got too large stopping at a small ice body to build a new colony might be a social event participated in by everyone.

I am not pushing the idea of a lifeboat, that is in fact just one of the benefits. Space ie the small objects in our inner solar system, contain fabulous riches and possibilities. If all the hardware had to be lifted from the Earth I would be agreeing with you, but the idea is to use the resources already in space. Beside a treasure trove of precious metals, one medium sized iron/nickel body would contain many times the platinum and gold currently held on earth and open these substances up for industrial use. All the materials needed to construct bases, habitats, and ships exist in huge quantities in space, Just waiting to be exploited. Carbon, water, ammonia, sulfur, to just name a few. Metals such as iron, nickel, titanium, aluminum, and any others we need are abundant. We are rapidly approaching the era of Von Newman type machines which could pave the way for us cheaply. To make money, money has to be spent, risks must be taken, if this was just about colonization then antarctica would be a better move... Can you show evidence this would be true? If rotating colonies were spread all over the solar system what calamity could cause them to return to earth for protection?

Thanks, ask and ye shall receive

Oh yeah, is the blog gone?

Is there some reason why when I click on unread content it doesn't take me to the last post in that thread?

I think it's important to note that an optimistic attitude is important, the moon landing was preceded by much speculation and science fiction. Many people questioned not only the why but the expense. If spending on space related activities was really exorbitant then a point would be conceded by me but as it stands now only a tiny percentage of what we spend on ways to end our civilization is spent on space travel. Literally more is spent in a year on the military than has been spent on NASA in 50 years... http://www.upworthy.com/defense-budget-1t-50-years-of-nasa-budgets-800b-chart-of-this-ridiculous-dispari

See below

From what I have read and listened to, the 100 miles X 20 miles is quite reasonable. Of course if you are going to be living there all the time you could go with less gravity and higher pressure. Lots more options than a torus and ways to surround a star. BTW a Dyson sphere as usually asserted by pop culture is, as far as we know, impossible but a Dyson swarm is completely supported by current technological advances. I've been following some futurists and have been blown away by what is possible within current limits..

So far I am getting lots of claims but no math, the biggest "claim" I find so far is a "Bishop Ring" Made from woven carbon fibers or nanotubes. This is the claim: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishop_Ring_(habitat) Not exactly a peer reviewed paper: http://www.iase.cc/openair.htm So far it is just a claim, I will look into it, but such a large mega structure is not necessary to provide millions of Earths surface area in orbit around the sun. Quite small habitats either in a swarm or connected like a chain could be used to enclose the sun in a loose swarm of objects to absorb the sun's energy. If we ever manage to control fusion on a reasonably small scale the entire universe is open to us via rotating habitats. My own thought on this are quite a bit more modest than most of these huge megastructures but the idea of even interstellar space containing a reasonable amount of material allows the entire galaxy to be colonised without ever entering the deeper parts of the gravity wells of stars. Here is a paper with math: http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/nano4/mckendreePaper.html My own thoughts on this are more modest: A torus built of carbon fibers, major diameter of 100 miles, minor diameter of 20 miles. The ratio is more important than the size within limits of material strength. It would resemble a circular suspension bridge, the inside gravity, atmosphere, and day night cycles would be controlled by the people living in it. Fusion power is necessary for these habitats to slowly occupy places like the kuiper belt, oort cloud, and interstellar space. I suggest the day night cycle could be maximized by 24 hours of light and 12 hours of darkness due to plants growth cycles being based on the length of darkness not daylight. This video by Isaac Arthur details some of this. I'll contact him and ask for the math, he is pretty good about providing it.

Interesting, my sources say that even steel can be used to make a Oneil type cylinder miles across, let check and I'll get back to you!

Exactly what "remarkable technological advancements" are you talking about? We currently have the technology to do this, yes it needs some development but that development cannot come to fruition on the Earth. Just because you do not see a problem happening tomorrow doesn't mean they will not happen. don't put all your eggs in one basket is a very wise old saying. An asteroid could be colliding with the earth as we speak, or it might be a million years from now. The amount of money we put into space exploration is a drop in the bucket compared to what we spend on ways to kill us all. Self destruction is far more likely than some sort of saving the economy, creating a paradise on Earth, or simply solving most of our problems before we act in space..

I would have to say no, the atmosphere of Venus is far too thick to allow that to happen. In fact I have seen some writings by Astronomers that indicate this would be true even for planets with thinner atmospheres. If you are interested I'll see if I can get you a link. Sun shades in orbit would help as would a much shorter day. Technically, at least according to some authorities, Venus is in the habitable zone.. barely. The long day might have contributed to the runaway greenhouse effect. Shade it, speed up its rotation, add lots of water, a magnetic field, and maybe a largish moon and you would have something. Some sources seem to think that floating balloon cities would be better since an oxygen nitrogen mix is lifting gas on Venus... Isaac discusses this from around 25:25 in this video.

So you would rather choose extinction rather than trying to occupy space because it will be difficult and expensive? https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Benefits-Stemming-from-Space-Exploration-2013-TAGGED.pdf

aren't you a ray of sunshine..