Hi. My name is Josh. I am very interested in the idea of space
settlement, because I believe that it is the only way we can ensure the
survival of our species.
To start off, I have a question: There is only a limited amount of space
in our solar system. Therefore, there is a limit to the number of people
who can live in it. By the time we reach that number, the technology to
extend life to hundreds or even thousands of years will probably exist.
(Though some say that we need to die, people want to live as long as
possible.) So people will face a hard choice: Require people to die at
age x (think of the movie Logan's Run), or greatly limit the number of
children born so that they replace the few deaths that occur. On Earth,
this problem exists on a smaller scale (since our life expectancy is
around 80 years), and we have solved it by lowering our fertility rate
(2.0 in the US, and 1.4 in Europe and Japan).
But it's not as simple as that. In space, we will be able to get around
this problem by starting new colonies when the existing ones fill up. So
the people who stay in the colonies that are full won't be very
interested in having kids. This will select for people who really want
kids each time a new colony is started. When the solar system is full,
it will be a much harder choice for them. Most likely, they won't be
able to live in a world with very few kids (less than 1% of the
population), but if they choose to die, then they won't be able to live
at all. So what do you think they will do?
The solar system wont get full for a long time. It could in fact support a
population in the Trillions with our standard of living.
--- Josh Kane wrote:
I know that there is a lot of physical space, but the resources can support a
limited number of people. It may be in the billions of trillions, but it is
still not infinite. All I'm saying is that this problem will eventualy be
reached. I don't know when that is; it depends on the limit to the population
and the growth rate.
I did this calculation. I based it on the amount of material that
could be easily mined and converted into colonies. The number was
about 10^19.
obscenely high.
Bill
--- In spacesettlers@y..., Josh Kane wrote:
> Hi. My name is Josh. I am very interested in the idea of space
> settlement, because I believe that it is the only way we can ensure
the
> survival of our species.
> To start off, I have a question: There is only a limited amount of
space
> in our solar system. Therefore, there is a limit to the number of
people
> who can live in it. By the time we reach that number, the technology
to
> extend life to hundreds or even thousands of years will probably
exist.
> (Though some say that we need to die, people want to live as long as
> possible.) So people will face a hard choice: Require people to die
at
> age x (think of the movie Logan's Run), or greatly limit the number
of
> children born so that they replace the few deaths that occur. On
Earth,
> this problem exists on a smaller scale (since our life expectancy is
> around 80 years), and we have solved it by lowering our fertility
rate
> (2.0 in the US, and 1.4 in Europe and Japan).
> But it's not as simple as that. In space, we will be able to get
around
> this problem by starting new colonies when the existing ones fill
up. So
> the people who stay in the colonies that are full won't be very
> interested in having kids. This will select for people who really
want
> kids each time a new colony is started. When the solar system is
full,
> it will be a much harder choice for them. Most likely, they won't be
> able to live in a world with very few kids (less than 1% of the
> population), but if they choose to die, then they won't be able to
live
Assuming a million tonnes per person (10^9 kg per person) if you take
apart the moon, that comes to 10^13 people. If you want to take apart
mars, earth, venus, and mercury the number quickly goes up.
yourself is a billion kg per person too high or too low?
Bill
--- In spacesettlers@y..., Josh Kane wrote:
> I know that there is a lot of physical space, but the resources can
support a
> limited number of people. It may be in the billions of trillions,
but it is
> still not infinite. All I'm saying is that this problem will
eventualy be
> reached. I don't know when that is; it depends on the limit to the
population
I realize that the number is very high, and it won't be reached for many years.
I'm just wondering what people will do then.
From: "Josh Kane"
To: "spacesettlers@egroups.com"
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 2:37 AM
Subject: [spacesettlers] Population
> But it's not as simple as that. In space, we will be able to get around
> this problem by starting new colonies when the existing ones fill up. So
> the people who stay in the colonies that are full won't be very
> interested in having kids. This will select for people who really want
> kids each time a new colony is started. When the solar system is full,
> it will be a much harder choice for them. Most likely, they won't be
> able to live in a world with very few kids (less than 1% of the
> population), but if they choose to die, then they won't be able to live
> at all. So what do you think they will do?
>
They will starve. The beautiful thing about *any* ecosystem - including the
ones that have people among their species - is that they self-regulate their
populations. If there is a space culture stupid enough (or unlucky enough,
or whatever) to have a population growth way too big, then they'll run out
of resources and that will finally limit their growth. Look at some starving
nations in, say, Africa and you'll see some examples of that self-regulation
in progress.
[snikt]
Lucio Coelho
I expect that human civilization, once we've achieved 'breakout' from
planet Earth (I like that term, Mike), will progressively use resources
further and further from Sol. For example, we might start using Lunar and
NEO resources. Then later, we'll use Main Belt asteroids, and the surface
of Mars. After the Main Belt, there are the Jupiter Trojan asteroids,
fully 1017 of them already discovered. But after that there's the Centaur
asteroids and the moons of the outer planets. After that there's the
Kuiper Belt. And after that there's the Oort cloud.
about a multi-trillion person civilization with advanced spacefaring
capabilities. We may be ranging halfway to the nearest star once we're in
the Oort cloud (there's speculation that there are dim stars that are
nearer to us than Proxima Centauri). Who knows where the Oort cloud of
one solar system ends and that of another begins?
I have a lot of faith in the creative ability of such a future civilization
to solve almost any problem thrown their way. Just start a research
project and put 100 billion of your brightest minds on the case. The
technologies available to such a civilization will be incredible.
I am NOT worried about future population problems once we've achieved
breakout!
Ron Menich
"Dr. Omni"
.com.br> cc:
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] Population
08/27/01 05:49
AM
Please respond
to
spacesettlers
From: "Josh Kane"
To: "spacesettlers@egroups.com"
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 2:37 AM
Subject: [spacesettlers] Population
[snikt]
> But it's not as simple as that. In space, we will be able to get around
> this problem by starting new colonies when the existing ones fill up. So
> the people who stay in the colonies that are full won't be very
> interested in having kids. This will select for people who really want
> kids each time a new colony is started. When the solar system is full,
> it will be a much harder choice for them. Most likely, they won't be
> able to live in a world with very few kids (less than 1% of the
> population), but if they choose to die, then they won't be able to live
> at all. So what do you think they will do?
>
They will starve. The beautiful thing about *any* ecosystem - including the
ones that have people among their species - is that they self-regulate
their
populations. If there is a space culture stupid enough (or unlucky enough,
or whatever) to have a population growth way too big, then they'll run out
of resources and that will finally limit their growth. Look at some
starving
nations in, say, Africa and you'll see some examples of that
self-regulation
in progress.
[snikt]
Lucio Coelho
--- In spacesettlers@y..., Josh Kane wrote:
> I realize that the number is very high, and it won't be reached for
many years.
> I'm just wondering what people will do then.
or nuclear power plant would be to an ancient Roman.
Then think on the problem of dark matter (or missing matter). The
galaxy's gravitation that holds our sun in its orbit shows that most
of the matter in our galaxy is unaccounted for.
We keep finding more and more stuff in the Oort cloud beyong Pluto.
The latest discovery seems to be bigger than Ceres. Suppose there are
comets and planetoids in all the spaces between stars in our galaxy.
That might go a long way to filling in the needed "missing matter."
And might allow humanity to slowly expand out from our solar system.
Rick
From:
To:
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 9:46 PM
Subject: [spacesettlers] Re:Population
> We keep finding more and more stuff in the Oort cloud beyong Pluto.
> The latest discovery seems to be bigger than Ceres. Suppose there are
> comets and planetoids in all the spaces between stars in our galaxy.
>
> That might go a long way to filling in the needed "missing matter."
[snikt]
There are also more than one study showing (through observation of
gravitational microlensing events) that interstellar space seems to be
littered with Jupiter-sized rogue "planets".
> Rick
[snikt]
Lucio Coelho
> They will starve. The beautiful thing about *any* ecosystem - including the
> ones that have people among their species - is that they self-regulate their
> populations. If there is a space culture stupid enough (or unlucky enough,
> or whatever) to have a population growth way too big, then they'll run out
> of resources and that will finally limit their growth.
magnitude greater than
on Earth. There are about one-hundred billion stars (I think) in the
galaxy alone. I think we'll have enough resources for quite awhile.
> Look at some starving
> nations in, say, Africa and you'll see some examples of that self-regulation
> in progress.
>
Actually, Africa is very rich in resources and has a low population
density. I've noticed, informally, that famine in Africa is highly
correlated with war and revolution. Europe experienced famine for a
brief time after the second world war, and India experience a "man-made"
famine during that same conflict. Africa's problems seem to derive
primarily from grossly incompetant leadership rather than inadequate
resources.
> Lucio Coelho
--
Al Globus
CSC at NASA Ames Research Center
aglobus@..., (650) 604-4404
http://www.nas.nasa.gov/~globus/home.html
The dinosaurs weren't spacefaring. We are. I don't think that's an
accident. Maybe we are life's taxi to the stars.
Hi Al,
> > They will starve. The beautiful thing about *any* ecosystem -
> including the
> > ones that have people among their species - is that they
> self-regulate their
> > populations. If there is a space culture stupid enough (or unlucky
> enough,
> > or whatever) to have a population growth way too big, then they'll
> run out
> > of resources and that will finally limit their growth.
>
> The resources in our solar system alone are about 6-8 orders of
> magnitude greater than
> on Earth. There are about one-hundred billion stars (I think) in the
> galaxy alone. I think we'll have enough resources for quite awhile.
>
> > Look at some starving
> > nations in, say, Africa and you'll see some examples of that
> self-regulation
> > in progress.
> >
> Actually, Africa is very rich in resources and has a low population
> density.
Couldn'r agree with you more! I used to live in Central Africa, and
during the years I was there, there were no shortages to speak of at
all.
> I've noticed, informally, that famine in Africa is highly
> correlated with war and revolution. Europe experienced famine for a
> brief time after the second world war, and India experience a
> "man-made"
> famine during that same conflict. Africa's problems seem to derive
> primarily from grossly incompetant leadership rather than inadequate
> resources.
This is not wholly true. The real problem out there is stupid European
and American journalists and mediamen who treat the whole place in their
items as if it was nothing but a rather minor nation instead of one of
the largest continents on our planet. If there is a war in Ethiopia it
is described as a war in Africa - and the whole of Africa including
other nations further away from Ethiopia than Finland in Europe is, get
blamed for being a bad investment risk, thereby grossly increasing the
task of any of the more competent African leaders in other countries
when they come to seek investment to develop their nations.
Zambia, where I was, is a country two and a half times larger than UK,
but it then (in the late 60s and early 70s) had a total population less
than Scotland (5 million as opposed to UK's 55 million). Dr Kenneth
Kaunda, who was a good leader (despite what the ignorant media say) was
being driven silly by international organizations continually telling
him to decrease his population when what he desperately needed was to
increase it, because he didn't have enough folk to properly farm the
place.
Outright idiocy on the part of Western Europe and the USA are much to
blame for Africa's problems today. Incompetent leadership in Africa is
to blame to some extent, but nowhere near as much as is made out.
> > Lucio Coelho
>
> --
> Al Globus
> CSC at NASA Ames Research Center
> aglobus@..., (650) 604-4404
> http://www.nas.nasa.gov/~globus/home.html
Best wishes, Andy Nimmo.
Dr. Omni wrote:
> ones that have people among their species - is that they self-regulate their
> populations. If there is a space culture stupid enough (or unlucky enough,
> or whatever) to have a population growth way too big, then they'll run out
> of resources and that will finally limit their growth. Look at some starving
> nations in, say, Africa and you'll see some examples of that self-regulation
> in progress.
If you're into Science Fiction, you should read 'Mote in Gods Eye'
by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle. Lets just say that self
regulation isn't always very nice.
Also, there was a book based on some frogs that really exist, that
regulate their population by eating their young, that was Larry
Niven also... forget the name offhand.
Real frog eat frog world Huh?
> [snikt]
> Lucio Coelho
--
- Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@...)
"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
technological civilization?"
- Gerard O'Neill
Ian Woollard wrote:
>
> Dr. Omni wrote:
>
> > The beautiful thing about *any* ecosystem - including the
> > ones that have people among their species - is that they self-regulate their
> > populations. If there is a space culture stupid enough (or unlucky enough,
> > or whatever) to have a population growth way too big, then they'll run out
> > of resources and that will finally limit their growth. Look at some starving
> > nations in, say, Africa and you'll see some examples of that self-regulation
> > in progress.
>
is quite low and resources are abundant. Populations are limited in
Africa by disease, war, and incompetence -- among other things.
--
Al Globus
CSC at NASA Ames Research Center
aglobus@..., (650) 604-4404
http://www.nas.nasa.gov/~globus/home.html
The dinosaurs weren't spacefaring. We are. I don't think that's an
accident. Maybe we are life's taxi to the stars.