Humanity will never go past Earth at this point. It's too busy global-warming and religious-warring itself to oblivion.
this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2025
21 points (74.4% liked)
Futurology
2923 readers
218 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I was gonna say something similar, then started reading OP's substack and I think they might agree: https://ghostofcarnot.substack.com/p/is-humanity-on-a-mission
I mean, we already did the moon, and probably will get back before shit gets too crazy to fund it.
Never is a really long time. I don't feel good committing to never. I'll agree not in my lifetime, though.
Once our technological society fails there is no longer access to space. You cannot reboot this in nongeological time span.
give it 200-1000 years
If we can’t figure out global warming and frequent wars, there’s no way we’ll make it.
As far as war, as we make it unprofitable that should help
Could we make a global treaty that says wars are illegal? If you start a war, the rest of the world will boycott you for 100 years.
Treaties and boycotts are uses of power. But power corrupts due to the survival of the selfish. Break the wheel!
That is true. Well, I’m out of options. As long as humans are greedy and arrogant, there’s no clean way to solve this problem. All of my ideas involve using power one way or another.
What if there was a technology that publishes the face of any murderer? (including soldiers) and bans them from my social network
Or a technology that allows a refugee to trade in everything they own and set up elsewhere without their livelihood being stolen?
because collective punishment has worked so well thus far?
Option B: Those who violate the treaty get chocolate pudding for dessert.
Can you come up with a better solution? It’s not a high bar to clear.
anyone capable of starting a war will be dead 100 years later, you are quite literally talking about punishing people who had nothing to do with it.
solution: Abolish the nation state and anyone who isn't involved gets chocolate pudding for dessert.
Everything is impossible until somebody goes and does it. While going to Mars and beyond is going to be very hard with current technology, there are other possibilities. Even in situ resource utilisation, e.g. making rocket fuel on the moon, would make it drastically easier to get around the solar system.
Then there is nuclear propulsion, which would hugely cut travel times. These are technologies that will likely be viable in the foreseeable future. Then we have fusion, which will probably take a little longer. And then there after things that nobody can even imagine today. Like nobody could imagine a smartphone thirty years ago.
And then there after things that nobody can even imagine today. Like nobody could imagine a smartphone thirty years ago.
I mean, there's people who did, going back pretty far. Just not the exact societal impact they would have. The laws of physics have been nearly complete for many decades, so don't expect a life of true surprises like a person born in 1870 would have experienced.
If you actually read this, OP says there's little point going anywhere in the solar system other than Earth. There's barren rocks right here if that's your thing, and they even come with free oxygen, gravity and radiation shielding. The rest is about interstellar travel.
The laws of physics have been nearly complete for many decades
it's been 100 years and we still haven't made any progress on the measurement problem besides thinking up reasons not to think about it.
Measurement definitely appears somehow, and we have a few ideas how. The simplest and increasingly most accepted just being that there's no new physics, and parallel universes as a result. None of the interpretations really have technological implications, beyond maybe a maximum size for quantum computers.
The Standard Model of particle physics itself has been around for 50, and I'm not sure it has any industrial applications to date. It just doesn't come up at energy densities we've found a reason to use. The parts of physics we know are missing happen in such extreme environments we can't even collect data on them right now.
I'd say it's unlikely but not impossible that any truly new and surprising technology will come out of quantum gravity or GUT. And then we're done for good.
I mean, there's people who did, going back pretty far.
People imagined all kinds of portable computers but none resembled a smartphone, as far as I'm aware. If I'm wrong, I'll be happy to learn about examples.
The Star Trek Communicator somewhat resembles it, and that is from 1964.
The Star Trek communicator was basically a walkie talkie. That was well established technology at the time and had nothing whatsoever to do with a smartphone.
I'm actually not sure about the "one big touchscreen" idea - it's seems likely some designer considered it, but even Star Trek TNG PADDs had more than one touch display segment.
Portable radio-type devices have been all over, portable computers as well, and networking radios autonomously together made appearances. Ditto for adding a camera to standard communications devices. I'm not really sure how much of it you need going at once to consider it a smartphone.
Like the guy in the link mentions, what people would choose to do with them and just how often was the hard thing to predict. When someone pops open a version of the internet in Heinlein it's always to do research. It's never cat pictures or porn or to post a random picture of themselves and what they're doing. Usually the computer is part of your spaceship or whatever, not in your pocket, just for that reason.
Maybe we could. We're just not going to last long enough to find out.
Mining on earth is extremely destructive, but if human civilisation is to survive the coming challenges, it will still need a source of high value raw materials.
Getting them from the astroid belt and refining it in space all via robotic probes seems not so far fetched.
But once such an industry is established the economies of space travel change dramatically.
Sure, overall I agree with the article, but there will be most likely a few that will leverage the economies of scale mentioned above for some human exploration beyond the belt.
Because if you are at a certain age and healthy enough, you can plan a nice multi-year trip without "return ticket" pretty easily and neither low gravity or radiation are a serious issue either.
I agree that with our current understanding we won't be going very far but like all future predictions it cannot account for scientific breakthroughs, even though you try to shoot that down at the end.
"Ever" is a long time. Human progress seems to come and go based on need and economics. At the moment we seem pretty distracted by local problems and I don't think any of us will still be around by the time humans kill the Earth, so it doesn't seem all that pressing.
But someday the technical issues will be solved and a sustainable habitat will be able to coast through space for however long it takes to travel beyond Mars to somewhere else interesting. When it's possible, I think some people will do it, perhaps a lot of people.
It's a worthy goal. As a human I feel some motivation to ensure the continuation of our species so I would lean towards any efforts that involve sending some backup copies of our DNA to some off-site storage.
Plot twist: by the time we or a descendant species dyson-sphere the sun, we're tunneling into alternative earths in alternate solar systems, many of which don't have a Mars.
it really has been too long since I’ve tripped on mushrooms
It's entirely possible. Actually I suspect Elon might get to Mars and realise it sucks, because he's nearly alone on a barren planet and Twitter has massive lag.
After the moon, Titan is the only place here that seems worth bothering with a colony on. Hopefully we do (some variant on) sleeper ships at some point, because our sun will only last so long, but if there's no dumb billionaires to fund it in the future we might just not bother.
Edit: That said, I wish OP made more of a distinction between cost, feasability and present mature technology. We can feasibly live without an atmosphere, but it might not be worth the cost. We can feasibly reach a few percent of lightspeed, but not with conventional rockets. (Other technologies are mentioned in the footnotes, but OP's grasp of the alternatives seems to be lacking. Fission-electric has working prototypes, we could theoretically make ourselves smaller or more space-hardy, magnetic parachutes to slow down...)
I think the conclusion is justifiable, but the whole thing is a bit sophomoric.
Shut up, Junior. You're in detention.
Random thought. If WW3 happens and a handful of people bail on earth and escape to the moon, would it actually be possible to manufacture a base and survive up there without any further support?
This may also be a sign I'm playing too much factorio
Depends on physics breakthrough. If we break speed of light we can make an elevator size device that would transport person to Mars in couple of minutes. It's just science is poorly funded, nobody cares about abstract studies anymore.