• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Ad Mare Before Ad Astra

existential risk space extinction human sea submarine

  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic
⌛⇒ support MITOMOUSE via LongeCity!

#1 robomoon

  • Guest
  • 209 posts
  • 18

Posted 03 October 2011 - 02:38 PM


The human race and our descendants can only benefit from space colonization. A fast decline of our population will not necessarily come with a guaranteed survival for one of our next generations on Earth. Finally, safety always pays off!

So ad astra with http://www.longecity...it-from-x-prize and towards http://www.theengine...1009410.article the moon.

Before the rocket goes up, just enjoy some easy math for a simple calculation involving the concept of "sapienocide" which is just a new word to define an event when the entire human race is getting extinct. It can happen that the gross value of all consumable resources incl. produced items and services on Earth is getting higher than a quintillion Dollars. Their net value, however, appears when consumers are just happy. A painful perception instead of pleasure has to be subtracted from the gross value, thus: pleasure minus pain = net value of resources.

About the chance that an experiment in dangerous research like particle physics or reproductive nano machines http://lifeboat.com/ex/nano.shield triggers an atomic chain reaction that changes the living environment of the Earth to the point of sapienocide: within the actual decade, the extinction risk for this Century might turn out to be estimated as only 1 in a hundred, also one percent. But due to the manic greed for more scientific knowledge deriving from greater physics research experiments, the next decade could bring humanity an extinction risk of more than three percent within this Century and more than twice as much within the next. So a risk of 10 percent for a sapienocide in the 22nd Century could be quite a plausible example when compared to other estimates in hindsight to risk evaluation.

When a great catastrophe is growing so much within this Century that all mammalian life gets annihilated, the gross value of consumable resources on Earth gets down to the equivalent of only one million Dollars. Despite of that great great loss in the range of multiple quadrillions, emotions could still be felt by an astronaut in an orbital station. An astronaut could survive the extreme compression of our Earth for some days after the intercontinental destruction which will most likely appear http://www.longecity...-earth-required in response of a delayed atomic chain reaction many decades after a misguided particle collision.

Even with a gross value above one billion Dollars in an orbital environment, an astronaut is getting so miserable from the intercontinental destruction event that net value of all enjoyable resources is getting down to the previous costs of a small submarine vessel. This calculation has not been adjusted by the beneficial qualities of an undersea environment for the simulation of colonization methods in outer space.

A small submarine habitat for hundred million Dollars could be endowed with a safety surplus that amounts to about a quadrillion dollars within half a Century. This amount includes the assembly of heavy shielding walls for a sealed submarine sphere. Sealing http://seasteading.o...oofing-concrete could be tight enough to simulate exposure in vacuum whereas a decent thickness of heavy plates in the outer walls could suggest enough shielding against increased radiation as existing in outer space.

#2 Lee Robinson Petzer

  • Guest
  • 47 posts
  • 145
  • Location:Groningen, The Netherlands

Posted 28 November 2011 - 03:22 PM

Seasteading should be an option considered over and above sub-orbital and space colonization. From a state point of view, it would be a case of which is possible firstly, then what is most viable, effective and what people want. Then of course there are commercial options. Commercial space has opened up, but what of commercial aquatic colonization in international waters.

What do you think would be the main hindrances to such a project?

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#3 robomoon

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 209 posts
  • 18

Posted 10 July 2012 - 02:56 PM

Main hindrances to aquatic colonization come up in the field of submarines. As long as all vessels are moving, there's not much settlement. Natural resources are required, like for fuel. These are not only in regions of waters where ships are located, but also at the bottom of the ocean and below. A habitat for settlement in the undersea environment, like a submarine tower anchoring on the sea bottom, might be like a fairly compact chain of spheres, one above each other. Thus, in a politically unstable situation, one sphere after another could be easily lifted out of its anchorage and moved away from its place which could make a settlement inside international waters not less difficult than outside.

Natural resources must be there to feed the power supplies for a submarine habitat with energy. This could not easily happen by harvesting natural resources like oil and gas from below the sea bottom. Energy sources for fuel from below the sea have already become very much a matter of increasing energy prices and a politically unstable situation. Another problem would be the great initial investments required to harvest those energy sources and the processing of harvested material into some useful fuel.

What's technically cheaper could be wave power, but one great hindrance for using it has become our current market system where marketable fuel quantities are required. Higher financial profits are quite necessary. Wave power cannot be filled into containers to be sold at fuel stations for higher prices enabling a decent profit. So we would need to choose a different economy. But who can replace the current market system by something less profit-oriented? If it's merely Cubans who are happy with that, we can only get into financial difficulties, like how to invest capital for a wave power plant in a communist country?

Edited by robomoon, 10 July 2012 - 03:03 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: existential risk, space, extinction, human, sea, submarine

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users