|
Survival of human civilization Main article: Space and survival The primary argument that calls for space colonization as a first-order priority is as insurance of the survival of human civilization, by developing alternative locations off Earth where humankind could continue in the event of natural and man-made disasters. Theoretical physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking has argued for space colonization as a means of saving humanity, in 2001 and 2006. In 2001 he predicted that the human race would become extinct within the next thousand years, unless colonies could be established in space.[2] The more recent one in 2006 stated that mankind faces two options: Either we colonize space within the next two hundred years and build residential units on other planets or we will face the prospect of long-term extinction.[3] Louis J. Halle, formerly of the United States Department of State, wrote in Foreign Affairs (Summer 1980) that the colonization of space will protect humanity in the event of global nuclear warfare.[4] The physicist Paul Davies also supports the view that if a planetary catastrophe threatens the survival of the human species on Earth, a self-sufficient colony could "reverse-colonize" Earth and restore human civilization. The author and journalist William E. Burrows and the biochemist Robert Shapiro proposed a private project, the Alliance to Rescue Civilization, with the goal of establishing an off-Earth backup of human civilization.[5] J. Richard Gott has estimated, based on his Copernican principle, that the human race could survive for another 7.8 million years, but it isn't likely to ever colonize other planets. However, he expressed a hope to be proven wrong, because "colonizing other worlds is our best chance to hedge our bets and improve the survival prospects of our species".[6] Survival of the biosphere Some of the more severe existential risks to humankind could also destroy parts or all of Earth's biosphere as well. An example would be a very large asteroid impact. And although many have speculated about life and intelligence existing in other parts of space, Earth is the only place in the universe currently known to harbor either of these (see: Fermi Paradox, and Rare Earth Hypothesis). But even if these threats are averted, eventually Earth is to become uninhabitable. This is due to the Sun getting hotter and brighter over its lifetime (the Sun was only 70 percent as bright as it is now when it first formed 4.5 billion years ago). It has been suggested that approximately 800 million years from now, that Earth will cease to be able to sustain multi-cellular life.[7] Later on in several billion years, the brightening Sun will cause a runaway greenhouse effect, extinguishing all life on Earth. Further information: Future of the Earth Vast resources in space Resources in space are enormous, both in materials and energy. The Solar System alone has, according to different estimates, enough material and energy to support a human population anywhere from several thousand to over a billion times that of the current human population.[8][9][10] Outside the Solar System in the Milky Way are anywhere up to several hundred billion other stellar systems. Expansion with fewer negative consequences Aside from Earth's, there are no currently known biospheres, nor indigenous people to be displaced by the encroachment of humanity. Could help Earth Another argument for space colonization is to mitigate the negative effects of overpopulation. If the resources of space were opened to use and viable life-supporting habitats were built, Earth would no longer define the limitations of growth. Although Earth's resources do not grow, one more and more learns to exploit them effectively, and sometimes even almost completely, on the basis of nuclear engineering.[11] In particular, progresses with the annihilation of matter could render spaceflight and colonization more efficient and affordable, to a revolutionary degree.[12] Moreover, as extraterrestrial resources become available, demand on terrestrial ones would decline.[13] Other arguments Additional goals cite the innate human drive to explore and discover, a quality recognized at the core of progress and thriving civilizations.[14] In 2001, the space news website Space.com asked Freeman Dyson, J. Richard Gott and Sid Goldstein for reasons why some humans should live in space. Their answers were:[1] Spread life and beauty throughout the universe Ensure the survival of our species Make money through new forms of space commercialization such as solar-power satellites, asteroid mining, and space manufacturing Save the environment of Earth by moving people and industry into space Provide entertainment value in order to distract from immediate surroundings, space tourism Ensure sufficient supply of rare materials, including from the outer Solar System—natural gas (in connection with expected worldwide hydrocarbons peak) and drinking water (in connection with expected worldwide water shortage) Freeman Dyson has suggested that within a few centuries human civilization will have relocated to the Kuiper belt.[15] Nick Bostrom has argued that from a utilitarian perspective, space colonization should be a chief goal as it would enable a very large population to live for a very long period of time (possibly billions of years) which would produce an enormous amount of utility (or happiness). He claims that it is more important to reduce existential risks to increase the probability of eventual colonization than to accelerate technological development so that space colonization could happen sooner.[16] In his paper, he assumes that the created lives will have positive ethical value despite the problem of suffering, or that future technology could solve it. |
About us|Jobs|Help|Disclaimer|Advertising services|Contact us|Sign in|Website map|Search|
GMT+8, 2015-9-11 21:58 , Processed in 0.247714 second(s), 16 queries .
