this post was submitted on
1,113 points (61% like it)
2,928 up votes 1,815 down votes
shortlink:

atheism

subscribe1,030,000 readers

Help victims of the Aurora shootings

Help victims of the Sikh shootings

Welcome to r/atheism, the web's largest atheist forum. All topics related to atheism, agnosticism and secular living are welcome here. Please read our FAQ.
New posts: New Rising
Self posts: New Relevant
Non-image posts: New Relevant

Recommended reading and viewing

Thank you notes

Related Subreddits <--the big list
GodlessWomen YoungAtheists AtheistParents
BlackAtheism AtheistGems DebateAnAtheist
skeptic agnostic freethought
antitheism humanism Hitchens
a6theism10 tfbd AdviceAtheists
Events
10/5-6 NAPCON2012 - Boston
08/11 Regional Conference - St. Paul MN
Giving
DWB/MSF fundraiser
Kiva lending team
FBB's Appeal to Freethinkers to Fight Cancer
Camp Quest
Ex* Groups
ex-Muslim ex-Catholic ex-Mormon
ex-JW ex-Jew ex-SistersinZion
ex-Bahai ex-Christian ex-Adventist
Assistance
Coming Out
Atheist Havens
Start an Atheist Club at Your School

Chat: #reddit-atheism on irc.freenode.net

Watch: #/r/atheism on reddit.tv

Read The FAQ

Submit Rage Comic

Submit Facebook Chat

Submit Meme

Submit Something Else

a community for
to anything interesting: news article, blog entry, video, picture...
message the moderators

MODERATORS

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

1112
1113

Sadly this is kind of true. (208.116.9.205)

submitted ago by Sirbinkai

all 107 comments
sorted by:
best
hot
new
controversial
top
old
best

[–]Occasionally_Right 27 points28 points ago

I like the message, but I don't think the author realizes just how big our galaxy is.

[–]jsmayne 5 points6 points ago

yay! lets sing the galaxy song now!

[–]cookie_42 5 points6 points ago

It's funny that a song about how insignificant we all are, can always put me in a good mood.

[–]rikonstruct 4 points5 points ago

He never said ALL of it!

[–]KambioN 1 point2 points ago

I'm exploring the galaxy right now (in my pants)

[–]Sirbinkai[S] 7 points8 points ago

yeah, your right. The message is all that matters i guess.

[–]Real-Life-Reddit 4 points5 points ago

matters

Unintentional pun is unintentional.

[–]big_star 7 points8 points ago

I thought she was talking about her grandpa's Ford Galaxy...

[–]harky 0 points1 point ago

It's a cool message, but even if the galaxy wasn't as massive as it is the message is pure sentiment. Lots of innovation comes directly from people being dicks. We'll explore the galaxy if we ever discover a means of FTL travel whether or not people stop being dicks. For all we know it will be discovered by a massive dick.

[–]JoeTheAwesomest 0 points1 point ago

Our lives aren't much more than five minutes when the lifetime of the galaxy itself is on the same scale.

[–]Mcflexington 20 points21 points ago

I like how you guys think it doesn't apply to you at all.

[–]ferocity101 9 points10 points ago

Very true, but my main question: what does this have to do with atheism?

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points ago

I guess you could ask the same question to people posting funny pics of NDT that have nothing to do with atheism.

[–]adamwho 1 point2 points ago

Easy explanation: Atheism (like r/skeptic) is a repository for science literacy/education promotion.

[–]SimilarImage 15 points16 points ago

Age User Title Reddit Cmnt Points
3 months deepfriedarjun NASA Budget, in a nutshell /r/space 55 663
5 months BalancedOpinion Just an idea I found on r/funny. here 7 150
5 months youngdeezy exploring the galaxy. /r/funny 162 902

This is an automated response

FAQ | Send Feedback | Report Error

[–]ofirissmart 2 points3 points ago

I can't go to space I'm too busy pwning theists on Facebook!

[–]sbizarre 6 points7 points ago

If i stopped going on reddit then maybe I would have enough time to explore the galaxy. :)

[–]SarcasticMSSam 0 points1 point ago

We can all relate. ಠ_ಠ

[–]axeman157 2 points3 points ago

This message is kinda naive.

[–]dreamingaswell 2 points3 points ago

Wasn't it our general dickishness throughout history that pushed us to explore and conquer and enslave all things beyond our borders?

[–]Vocalities 2 points3 points ago

http://i.imgur.com/chdt6.jpg

[–]dumnezero 5 points6 points ago

why post this here?

[–]horrorshowmalchick 1 point2 points ago

I don't know. I guess he's implying that if religious wars stopped then we could use the allocated money to explore space?

[–]dumnezero 2 points3 points ago

So... /r/politics ?

I'm just saying that there's nobody you need to convince here; we're already with you on this.

[–]RedAnarchist 0 points1 point ago

That would make some sort of sense if religion was one of the top sources of war.

It's not.

[–]horrorshowmalchick 0 points1 point ago

Yeah, he certainly doesn't have a sound argument, but I think that was what he was going for. (I seem to have assumed the poster is male??)

[–]Lots42 3 points4 points ago

I can't help but think of Star Trek, where the Federation leaves aliens alone until they, the aliens, develop warp travel. Then it's all 'Hi, want to be friends? We got some cool shit, like spaceships with gravity'.

[–]ABoss 1 point2 points ago

Am I the only one who was freaked out by linking a direct ip?

[–]captain_youre_a_tool 1 point2 points ago

I like how you turned the word "dick" into "religious"

[–]doohnam 1 point2 points ago

nice swastika galaxy

[–]DresdenPI 1 point2 points ago

Yeah, but then after the 5 minutes were up we'd be dicks on a galactic scale.

[–]dheinzen2 1 point2 points ago

We would also need a space program...

[–]UrsusArctos 2 points3 points ago

Actually, this is completely wrong. It is between 100-120k light years in diameter and 1000 light years thick. Even if we were traveling at the speed of light (which according to Einstein's theory of relativity, we cannot), it would take us a while. There are many problems that would have to be considered (fuel, repairs, food&medicine if it will be a ship with people, etc). It really bothers me when people spread this particular image because it is wrong. I think it would be more accurate if it said solar system. It would take ~25000 light years to reach the center of the galaxy from Earth. Sources 1/2

[–]Occasionally_Right 4 points5 points ago

Even if we were traveling at the speed of light (which according to Einstein's theory of relativity, we cannot), it would take us a while.

Only from the perspective of people left behind. If you could get going fast enough (which means surviving accelerations on the order of several tens of thousands of g), you could in principle visit the far side of the galaxy while spending less than a day on your ship.

Of course, you'd come back to a world in which a few hundred thousand years had passed, but who cares about those people when you can see stars from the other side of the galaxy?

[–]UrsusArctos 0 points1 point ago

Actually, you would appear to be stretched out to those around you (and probably be stretchered out too) if you approach the speed of light. For you, it would still take some years to travel to your destination (depending on how far it is in light years) , but for others around you, thousands of years would have passed. So you are correct there.

you could in principle visit the far side of the galaxy while spending less than a day on your ship.

Pretty sure this is wrong. Light years is a measure of distance (the distance it takes light to travel in one year to be exact) . The light from the center of the galaxy takes ~25000 years to reach Earth. Assuming we are traveling at 99.99% the speed of light, it would still take someone ~25000 years to reach the center of the galaxy. I just covered light years in my astronomy class and saw the episode of Cosmos that covered traveling at the speed of light.

[–]Occasionally_Right 0 points1 point ago

Actually, you would appear to be stretched out to those around you (and probably be stretchered out too) if you approach the speed of light.

That's...not correct. Moving objects appear shorter; this is called "length contraction". And, actually, it's not even right to say they appear shorter. It turns out that length contraction is actually "invisible" in the sense that objects don't really "look" shorter. Rather, you find that if you calculate how long the object "really" is based on how long it took the light to reach you, you will find that it is shorter despite not appearing so.

Pretty sure this is wrong.

It's not.

Light years is a measure of distance (the distance it takes light to travel in one year to be exact) .

Yes.

The light from the center of the galaxy takes ~25000 years to reach Earth.

Yes.

Assuming we are traveling at 99.99% the speed of light, it would still take someone ~25000 years to reach the center of the galaxy.

According to the people with respect to whom you're traveling at that speed, yes. According to you? No. Length contraction again. To the people on Earth, your clock ticks so slow that only a short time passes (though at only 99.99% the speed of light your clock would still pass several hundred years during the trip). To you on the other hand, the center of the galaxy is approaching at 99.99% the speed of light but the distance is contracted down to a few hundred light-years so it only takes a few hundred years for the center of the galaxy to reach you. Length contraction in your reference frame and time dilation in Earth's reference frame conspire to make sure everyone agrees that when you are at the center of the galaxy only a few hundred years have passed on your ship's clocks.

I just covered light years in my astronomy class and saw the episode of Cosmos that covered traveling at the speed of light.

I've spent the last five years studying (among other things) the mathematical formalism and physical interpretations and consequences of the special and general theories of relativity.

[–]UrsusArctos 0 points1 point ago

Ahh. Forgive me. As you can see I am not as knowledgeable as you are. There is only so much watching documentaries and shows on space can do! But thank you for replying so kindly. I appreciate your response! Do you know of any websites/videos/links..etc. where i could learn more about this? :)

[–]Occasionally_Right 0 points1 point ago

Forgive me.

There's nothing to forgive. You made an honest attempt to correct what you believed to be an error in my understanding, and that should be applauded, not forgiven. That you misunderstood the subject yourself is unfortunate, but has been at least somewhat corrected.

Do you know of any websites/videos/links..etc. where i could learn more about this? :)

Wikipedia is a good start. Their introductory article on the special theory of relativity is quite comprehensive without being too technical. If it turns out to be above your level mathematically, the simple English version might help.

If you have, or want, a calculus background and wish to delve into the actual mathematics on which the theory is based, I can provide additional (free) technical sources.

[–]UrsusArctos 0 points1 point ago

If you would like to provide them, I would very much appreciate it. Thank you again! :)

[–]Occasionally_Right 1 point2 points ago

The best free online resource I know of for an introduction to the special theory of relativity is this wikibook. The first six chapters basically require only a bit of algebra, a cursory knowledge of matrix multiplication (and even that's not entirely necessary), and a bit of comfort with the idea of coördinates. In fact, if all you want are the results you can basically ignore the math (or take it as "given") and just read the exposition. Also, most of the necessary mathematics is presented in the text. If you aren't familiar with mathematics at that level, then I suggest first stopping by the Khan Academy for free video lectures on the appropriate subjects (in the algebra, calculus, and linear algebra sections).

Other resources are widely available online, including the more advanced Wikipedia pages on the topic.

[–]UrsusArctos 0 points1 point ago

Wow. Thank you so much. This is really awesome. I really, really appreciate it!

[–]SolarGoat 2 points3 points ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive

[–]reiji-maigo 0 points1 point ago

Improved Alcubierre Drive

[–]Occasionally_Right 1 point2 points ago

This isn't an "improved Alcubierre drive", it's an analysis of the original Alcubierre drive in the context of higher dimensions. Which would be interesting if there were any reason at all to believe we lived in a higher-dimensional universe.

[–]reiji-maigo 0 points1 point ago

Thank you for the clarification...

Aren't there at least some hints that higher space dimensions (theoretically) exist somehow?

[–]Occasionally_Right 1 point2 points ago

Nope. There are some speculative models that incorporate large extra dimensions, but as of yet all experimental and observational evidence is consistent with our 3+1 dimensional models and no evidence to suggest the existence of more dimensions. In fact, recent results at the LHC have even ruled out some of those models (though, if I'm reading the papers right, not the model used in your link above).

[–]reiji-maigo 0 points1 point ago

Read about it, too...

Too bad, since it would be very exciting... On the other hand it would mean a step back for the Theory of Everything...

(At least, there is a glimmer of hope left to see a FTL-drive someday...)

[–]Occasionally_Right 0 points1 point ago

The Alcubierre drive is nothing more than a mathematical curiosity.

[–]adamwho 2 points3 points ago

The truth is the physical laws in the universe are HIGHLY against interstellar travel by biological beings.

We will likely go extinct once our resources run out without ever leaving the solar system.

[–]Tao23 4 points5 points ago

If we can get off the damn Earth our chances of ranging out farther improve dramatically. The asteroid belt alone contains the resources of a small planet. http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/neo/resource.html

The Oort cloud, dramatically more. Perhaps 40 Earths worth. http://www.solarviews.com/eng/oort.htm

From what's out there, it wouldn't be much of a trick to build craft large enough to carry thousands of people on sublight journeys to neighboring star systems even if a method of FTL travel is never discovered.

It would likely take millions of years, though, to colonize a galaxy... and might never happen. http://www.geoffreylandis.com/percolation.htp If it did happen that way, the end result would probably be many divergent species of humans. We are talking millions of years, here.

We're also a little short of the technology. We could kick something like this off now... but we'd probably need worldwide cooperation and to stop spending money on extravagances like wars.

Give us 50 or 100 years at our present level of technological advance without a collapse and it might become something a major nation could fund.

[–]reiji-maigo 0 points1 point ago

Agreed... And when we're already on it with breaking down military, next on the list are national borders and interest rates... (or most of our messed up financial system... Muslims do it a bit better, AFAIK...) Religions can stay if they behave... ò_ó

On the colonization project, if everything else fails we can still leave some Von Neumann probes behind and become Borg... =)

[–]Tao23 1 point2 points ago

Better Borg than Berserker! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berserker_%28Saberhagen%29

[–]adamwho 0 points1 point ago

It isn't a technology problem.

The issue is that you cannot carry enough fuel to get anywhere in a reasonable amount of time (decades). And this is assuming the most efficient fuel possible (anti-matter) with maximum efficiency (100%).

You of course will respond that we don't need to get there in a reasonable time. However, long travel times with humans inside require a lot more spaceship to keep them alive and happy... and a lot more mass. This makes the fuel problem worse. This of course also assumes no need for repairs after 100s of years of flight time.

I hesitate to work through the numbers in detail because people have such an emotional connection to the dream that humans will live some sort of Star-Trek fantasy in the future that facts are irrelevant and I don't want to waste my time.

[–]Tao23 0 points1 point ago

Yeah, when you try to pare travel times down from the centuries we could probably achieve now to decades, you're spot-on.

We might manage decades with a Bussard ramjet... but then we cut the passenger load down to the point where inbreeding is a probably-fatal problem for our colonists.

That said, don't count technology out. We have begun to develop a lot of neat tricks... but when it comes to propulsion, they generally have really crappy efficiency. Efficiency improvements alone could shift a decimal point on the travel times a propulsion system could provide over light years.

Here's a really super crude form of propulsion: nuclear pulse drive. Horribly inefficient. A really banging-rocks-together concept in terms of sophistication. A century or less to the nearest star. http://www.universetoday.com/15403/how-long-would-it-take-to-travel-to-the-nearest-star/

[–]rstuckmaier 0 points1 point ago

I don't want to put you though any unnecessary work but once a ship is moving is there really much fuel needed?

I know we'd need electricity, climate control, water purification, and probably a few other bits and pieces but is that what you meant by energy needed?

In my mind I try to picture interstellar travel ships like this, but a larger scale. We have the same booster rockets to get off of Earth then the "shuttle" would redock into one of these engines. The engines could be made entirely out of materials mined from asteroids/meteors to cut down costs significantly.

I'm sure this is a very long ways away and we'll (we being those currently alive, no humanity itself) most likely be long dead by then.

[–]Occasionally_Right 0 points1 point ago

I don't want to put you though any unnecessary work but once a ship is moving is there really much fuel needed?

You need to stop at your destination.

Also, you have to choose between needing a truly stupendous amount of fuel in order to get up to and come down from relativistic speeds, or spending several millenia on the trip. The latter has the added disadvantage that once you're out in between the stars there are no supply stations.

[–]adamwho 0 points1 point ago

Getting things up to a reasonable speed and them slowing it down by the same amount, is the problem. There is some fuel used to keep things going due to pressure in space. (there are particles in space that would over a long period slow the ship down some.

There is also some energy needed to sustain life, but this isn't the bulk of the energy used.

I don't think you exactly understand the scale of energy required. Lets assume a 'slow' approach going .1c, to say gliese 581 g, 20LY away, so you are looking at a minimum 200 year trip. To get started you need 4.5e14J of energy per kg you need that much again to stop and then a bunch more to sustain life for 200+ years. Your ship will easily have a mass like a battle ship at 30 million kg. This puts you at around 3e22J just for the flight... which is in the neighborhood of ALL the energy supplies available on Earth. Of course converting on the energy supplies on earth to something you can carry (pure anti-matter) is not 100% efficient. The fuel itself weights a huge amount and you have to keep half of it safe for 200+ years. Of course all this assumes 100% efficiency of the engines.... and we haven't even started talking about keeping biological life alive for 200 years.

If you want to go faster, you carry more fuel but there is a break-even point even assuming the most optimistic case, which is around .3c. This will require more energy that Earth has available.

[–]AngryMormon 2 points3 points ago

We're here only for few thousand years and look what we have already made. I say there is no chance that we won't get out of this solar system in 100 years. For example look at NMT-900 cell phone from 1989, then at Nokia 1100 from 2003, and finaly at Nokia smartphones from 2011-2012. You can perfectly see how technology devolopement is speeding up. (by the way, i hate nokia smartphones)

[–]adamwho 1 point2 points ago*

Don't confuse technology with science.

There are hard physical barriers which technology will not solve. Basically, you cannot carry enough fuel to get anywhere in a reasonable amount of time.

[–]AngryMormon 1 point2 points ago

How about a rocket powered by energy formed by matter-antimatter annihilation? Or who knows, maybe even crazier stuff. I doubt that we would ever be able to travel around our whole galaxy, unless wormhole theory would be proven and warp speed achieved. But who knows... it's not so long ago that we thought that Earth is flat.

[–]adamwho 0 points1 point ago

My calculation (shown in other posts) assumes exactly that type (anti-matter) of propulsion.

Worm-holes are the creation of science fiction and some mathematics, there is no physical justification for such things. There is no 'worm-hole theory'.

The gambit that 'somebody long ago was wrong about something therefor my pet theory might be true' doesn't work here. There is no secret about how to move a macroscopic object from point A to B. You might as well be arguing... people once thought the world was flat, therefor we might discover that it is a cube on day.

[–]AngryMormon 0 points1 point ago

I don't feel any need to argue about stuff that you have obviously more knowladge then I do, and I'll check thru your posts to find the calculations because it sounds pretty interesting to me. Wormhole isn't a fiction, it's a hypothesis, there are many physicist that support it because it's linked to many other hypothesis, because it's supposed to be dimensional shortcut in our spacetime. Please note I'm into chemistry and not theoretical physics, so I might missed some stuff and I'd like to know about them if i did. And to the last part, I wanted to just rise awareness of many other possible secrets we didn't yet discover, so you simply can't predict the future. So I still believe we will find a way to achieve interstellar travel.

[–]adamwho 1 point2 points ago

Wormholes are solutions to GR field equations, they are math. Since there is no evidence for their existence and the conditions for such things to exist don't even seem possible (a mass bending space-tine into a tube that goes somewhere) they really don't even rise the level of hypothesis... they are conjecture.

Physicists don't actually "support" such an idea unless they are attempting to get on TV or selling a book on futuristic speculation. Imagine if you heard a chemist talking about making things out of a material made solely of neutrons... such things can exist on paper.

[–]AngryMormon 0 points1 point ago

Wow.. that makes sence. You got me there.

[–]reiji-maigo 1 point2 points ago

We are far from something looking like truth...

You are right that at the moment it looks like it will not be possible...

But there were people who said, humans are not made to fly or move faster than a horse, because it will rip your soul out... And today the people who are remembered are those who said, "fuck the whiners and sceptics, lets do it..."

[–]adamwho 1 point2 points ago

The physical laws that govern macroscopic objects like spaceship and people are complete, we can say with certainty what is possible with spaceships. More detail on this point

Your example of "so and so thought something and they were wrong" doesn't actually work anymore in this case, we know definitively what energy it takes to move a spaceship from point A to B.

[–]reiji-maigo 0 points1 point ago

From my laymans point-of-view I can't disagree there... But as I know there are some fundamental things that are not known or untested (or untestable) theories right now... (Space, Time, Gravity to name some...)

So I do hope there are some loopholes to get around those limitations...

Just some naive hope and the certainty that we as a civilisation are able to find them if they exist (and enough time left to do so...)

[–]BluePaladin25 0 points1 point ago

I agree, with one small change:

The physical laws in the universe are highly against interstellar travel by biological beings VIA TRADITIONAL METHODS. If somebody ever figures out a way to make a "warp drive" / stable wormhole generator / etc, the physical laws of the universe can go screw themselves.

Until then, though, we're stuck here. :(

[–]adamwho -1 points0 points ago*

If you can show some physical justification for the existence such exotic things other than science fiction and math then they will be considered. Right now wormholes are just about as realistic as claiming time travel exists because we can put '-t' in an equation.

[–]mash3735 1 point2 points ago

or get off reddit.

[–]dumnezero -1 points0 points ago

no, we could use reddit as a work space for planning ...

[–]Vkts 1 point2 points ago*

Sadly, exploration of galaxy is more of a business question right now. It costs freaking huge amounts of money, while ROI isn't guarateed. During cold war USSR and USA were "measuring their dicks" by flying things into space to proove if socialism or capitalism rules. It's over now, there is no god up there to discover, no 'unobtanium' to collect, and just a few people, organisations and governments are willing to spend money just for science. Just IMHO.

[–]darksmiles22 2 points3 points ago

GPS and media satellites are great investments for the money, and telescopes and unmanned spacecraft to Jupiter's moons or to scan the horizon for new physics could yield amazing scientific insights. The USSR and USA (and China) aren't the only countries with dicks to swing either: India is going to the moon and putting people into orbit. It's only a matter of time until Pakistan and increasingly smaller countries get in on the game, not to mention the emerging market of private companies like SpaceX. There are even a number of space hotels in the works.

These are enough reason to keep improving space transport technology, and as a matter of fact costs are lowering at astronomical rates. Crazy as Newt sounded, I wouldn't be surprised if the first permanently manned moon colony happens in our lifetime.

[–]Vkts 0 points1 point ago

First moon colony in our lifetime

Ahh, come on, NASA. I want to live in a distant star system already. I don't want to be the guy "Oh, if he had lived just a couple of years more, he could have joined the "Immortality in space" program. And this is why I hate religions, raging ecologists, ethics and stuff, they are slowning the progress. I WANNA FUCKING INTO SPACE.

[–]IMMENSELY_BRAVE -1 points0 points ago

There are other science fields that are more worth investing in than a space program. Medicine for example can actually help people, you could invest in renewable energy sources or even help people in poor countries, if science ain't your thing.

Space travel, at least the places that are reachable, will not actually help anybody. It is merely interesting and very, very expensive.

[–]darksmiles22 1 point2 points ago

GPS and media satellites provide a valuable service, and telescopes to discover new things about the distant and early universe, life on other planets, and dark energy/dark matter could provide revolutionary advances in physics. Even if those discoveries don't result in new technologies, neither does the World Cup, but we spend billions on that and other globally unifying forms of entertainment.

[–]IMMENSELY_BRAVE 0 points1 point ago

Satellites are not part of exploring the galaxy. Telescopes are not part of a space program I think, but I could be wrong on that. However, to actually reach anything you see you will need to go there, which, again, is too expensive and currently nearly impossible.

As for advances in physics, renewable energies are also physics and if they become efficient enough then there's an alternative to fossile energies. I think that is the next step to take, since they definitely result in new technologies.

And yes, the world cup and similar things are ridiculously expensive while being rather pointless. That doesn't mean we need more or other pointless, expensive things :P

[–]darksmiles22 0 points1 point ago

Exploring the solar system and developing space transportation are stepping stones to exploring the galaxy.

Besides, it's not like we have to choose between investing in space exploration or renewable energies - we can do both! Picking one only would be like choosing between developing a school system or an interstate highway system.

The world cup and cosmic understanding are not pointless. Such things entertain and provide a sense of identity and purpose.

[–]IMMENSELY_BRAVE 0 points1 point ago

If someone manages to develop solar energy to be more efficient then space travel would be made a lot easier :P

Currently the US and all of Europe have quite a financial deficit, so I doubt space exploration will become a thing until it gets more affordable.

And if you put the world cup against curing cancer or making cars drive on hydrogen then the world cup is rather unimportant :p

[–]Tao23 0 points1 point ago

That's what the Spanish court said about Columbus' silly plan. There's always an excuse to stay home.

His expeditions led to Spain being the richest country on Earth and the foremost world power for a couple of centuries.

Bonus: there are no sentient beings in the rest of the solar system to abuse the way the Spanish (and later European arrivals) abused the locals when they arrived.

[–]IMMENSELY_BRAVE 0 points1 point ago

Space around earth is a bunch of rocks and giant spheres of gas floating in a vacuum, which is why there are no sentient beings there.

It's not an excuse to stay home, it's the reason why this is home.

[–]Tao23 0 points1 point ago

'A bunch of rocks' is where the materials for your computer, car, cellphone, clothing, food, home, and/or the equipment to make them come from.

The 'bunch of rocks' floating around the solar system contain the same range of resources the 'bunch of rocks' here on the ground do, and there are enough of them to make roughly 50 Earths. That's not counting whatever can be had from the actual planets. Or the solar energy that's free to collect, and much easier to collect once you're outside the atmosphere.

But hey, we have it all right here, why leave the forest and develop agriculture and city-building and range over the planet? Like I said, there's always a reason to stay home.

And then there are the idiots who have ranged out on fools' quests and who are responsible for the entirety of civilization that makes it possible for us to debate via computer rather than sit around sharpening some new sticks to dig wild yams with.

[–]IMMENSELY_BRAVE 0 points1 point ago

Getting resources from space is a valid argument and will probably become interesting in the near future. However, currently technology is not far and travel is not fast enough to transport the resources properly. Pushing for flying around in space right now won't be of great use.

If someone can develop an atmosphere then living on other planets might even be an option. However with the current financial deficits in the US and Europe, wars going on, the current technology and the still high availability of resources on earth it is not time for space travel yet.

If there is some kind of related breakthrough however, it will be. That is still far from Spain going to conquer planets though :P

[–]GodStopper90 0 points1 point ago

Without even developing the technology then how will we ever accomplish space travel. Going to Mars is just a goal, to measure our dicks as someone else said, we will never know what we can accomplish unless we try. Also we are all procrastinators we develop better when there's a goal to be achieved, or for money.

[–]IMMENSELY_BRAVE 0 points1 point ago

The technology for space travel is also very useful elsewhere. If you put money into a space program right now you will achieve much less than if the technology necessary for it has had a breakthrough. And that research usually won't benefit from money you put into the actual space program since it does not directly have to do with it.

There's no hurry to start a space program since there's many other problems that need to be solved quickly.

[–]Tao23 0 points1 point ago

Pretty much what you said, sadly. My personal feeling is it's raining soup up there and we're complaining about the price of bowls... but it would be enormously difficult and expensive to try at present. Right now, the best chance to make a profit at it would be shoving a smallish near-Earth object into a collision course with the moon, breaking it down on the surface, and firing it home via mass driver in what would be essentially buckets with parachutes attached.

Too long-range for us (it'd probably be a decade-long project at best to try) and too risky without way more of an incentive. Perhaps when the exotics we're making cellphone & laptop batteries with run low... :)

Now, interestingly, there's been quite a bit of talk about solar power collection in orbit, transmitted to Earth via maser. Seemed to pick up a bit following the tsunami in Japan; the Japanese may be considering it as an option to wean themselves from nuke plants following the disaster. Be interesting to see where this goes. Much more feasible for short-term returns.

[–]Drakonisch 0 points1 point ago

Space travel will matter quite a bit when our star is getting ready to go nova.

[–]IMMENSELY_BRAVE 0 points1 point ago

Whatever star you are referring to, that isn't anywhere close to the near future.

[–]Drakonisch 0 points1 point ago

Neither is intergalactic travel.

[–]dredawg -1 points0 points ago

Frankly its human nature to be dicks to each other and the human genome is being diluted and dumbed down because stupid people are breeding at uncontrolled rated.

This movie may be a comedy of sorts, but the underlying message is there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMkrJOOTjj4

[–]rinoshea 5 points6 points ago

http://xkcd.com/603/

You don't get to be sad that stupid people reproduce more. You have a responsibility to help them if you feel so strongly.

[–][deleted] ago*

[deleted]

[–]rinoshea 2 points3 points ago

I agree with that. Am I missing the point?

There's no arguing that poorer, less educated people reproduce faster. But sitting here bitching about it doesn't do any good. We should take material steps to help solve it, like voting for people who would increase the education budget and fund scientific research to study new strategies that can be implemented in the education system to improve the efficiency of learning.

I just don't like when people who have basically everything (relative to the rest of the world) rest on their wealth, education, and thoughtfulness, and feel disgusted by the rest of the world. For me, it's much more admirable to work to bring about change in those areas, rather than bemoaning them.

[–]mvincent17781 0 points1 point ago

And being an advocate and speaking out about it isn't attempting to change it? I would argue this he is creating awareness, step one in any attempt to create change.

[–]rinoshea 1 point2 points ago

Awareness without a proposal to effect that change is worthless. Case in point: Kony 2012.

(Side note: thanks to both of you for civility of this discussion. Rare occurrence out here on the interwebs.)

[–]mvincent17781 0 points1 point ago

Worth less? Sure. But I wouldn't say worthless. If all you do is cause someone else to take up your cause, with their own strategy to combat the issue, I'd say that still counts for something. It truly is worthless if absolutely no good comes of it. (Side note: I just like to play Devil's advocate. I enjoy discussion)

[–]silent_p 0 points1 point ago

People have a tendency to act in self-interest because it ensures survival, and humans with no self-interest didn't survive to reproduce. However, empathy evolved the same way, since we get a competitive advantage from maintaining a healthy, cooperative society. Humans have both natures for different, perfectly legitimate reasons. Just because every human civilization we've studied has developed some form of music doesn't mean we can definitively say "it's human nature to be a musician."

Also, our genomes aren't getting "dumbed down". There isn't a lot of variation between brains, in humans over the past 10,000 years or so. Any difference in "intelligence" that we've actually been able to perceive is a matter of education and culture, and many cultures have erroneously devalued education as a means of cultural protectionism. Just like in economics, protectionism leads to stagnation.

[–]TheDreamHunter 0 points1 point ago

Alternatively we could wipe out poverty first?

[–]supergalactic 0 points1 point ago

Sadly this was posted weeks ago

[–]cr3wsin 0 points1 point ago

anyone else think the galaxy looks like a swastika?

[–]joshland 0 points1 point ago

Forgot to login to reddit, usually avoid /r/circlejerk /r/atheism, but I think this message is useful and I am glad I forgot to login.

[–]DoctorLost173 0 points1 point ago

We are exploring the galaxy...

[–]lowcostredditor 0 points1 point ago

We don't have money.

[–]RegencyAndCo 0 points1 point ago

I like how you guys are working on exploring the galaxy instead of being dicks about atheism.

[–]gbtimmon 0 points1 point ago

fuck off you twat.

[–]bscoder 0 points1 point ago

If we could somehow eliminate the practice of publicly espousing as facts things which are in no way facts, then an enormous void would be created in the area of reasons to be a dick.

[–]Age_of_Empire_Priest -1 points0 points ago

WOLOLO

[–]flesjewater -1 points0 points ago

nah

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2012 reddit inc. All rights reserved.

REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.

π Rendered by PID 5914 on app-138 running fc22e53.