Curious layman

Your

19 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Why would we want to send microbes out into space if life already exists there? 

Given the correct conditions life is inevitable at according to Jeremy England

Again, distance is meaningless given time and traveling for tens of thousands of years is the point. But the travel isn't done by one ship. The idea is that one ship can reproduce it's self by "living off the land" or in other words using material it encounters in space, which is not as empty as people think" and planets become unnecessary. Planets, being deep gravity wells, could and probably would, be avoided in such a scenario in favor of cosmic debris like oort cloud objects. These objects also exist between stars as well but even dust could be collected to harvest volatiles that would be lost over thousands of years of travel time. See O'Neil cylinders  and or Stanford torus

Probably correct but it's not impossible or even particularly unlikely... 

Your right about the microbes, would be pointless come to think of it, Nice links, will check out your you tube channel also.

17 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Why do you think we would need to get humans out of the solar system? It is quite possible to build self contained habitats inside the solar system that would equal millions of earths in surface area. 

Wouldn't that be at the risk of infecting other planets with our microbes? 

I see no reason to assume that... 

Well I guess you can think anything you want but are you asserting there is no other life in the universe? 

Not impossible, not even difficult, see the first part of my answers, such habitats could slowly travel all over the galaxy stopping to make new habitats even if there are no other planets. BTW if you lend credence to UFOs then this could be the source, other civilizations could already be growing in the oort cloud or kuiper belt and we would be none the wiser.  

Me either.. 

I was thinking about humans expanding out into the universe (we can't stay here forever can we?), it just seems impossible (travelling close light speed anyway), wouldn't it make more sense to focus on simple, basic forms of life. Using our knowledge to be responsible for life itself expanding into the galaxy, instead of ourselves.

As for the microbes, I was thinking more about sending probes to planets to "kick start" life, obviously this would take billions of years. The emphasis is on how to give life the best chance to survive and continue to evolve.

 I disagree when you say it's not even difficult, surely the distances would make it highly improbable? What about air, you could be travelling for thousands of years between stars.

I do think that there are aliens in the solar system, but not big green things though, microbes and bacteria.

Never really believed but didn't not believe either, just accepted it (god) as normal when I was I kid in U.K., started to really think about god during the famine in Ethiopia, seeing pictures of snipers killing kids in Bosnia didn't help either, not to mention the holocaust. 

There have been times when I've leaned towards religion in the past though.

No idea, but what a stunning photo, better than any painting.

I personally think that human intelligence/complexity is a double edged sword, it's allowed us to become advanced, but the next stage of human evolution is space, and space is the most extreme environment there is, it seems impossible to practically get humans out out the solar system, too much energy, we need stimulation, prone to disease, food, water, vitamins etc... 

Its this reason I think the next "branch" on the tree of life won't be a more advanced version of us but more of a devolution, just basic life forms, microbes that we send of towards planets in habitatal zones, after that I think the next branch will be new civilisations. 

What do you think? Do you think we're just to complex to realistically leave the solar system? 

I think in the future the emphasis will be to get life out in to the universe, rather than humans. This is also why I think UFO ( aliens ) is nonsense, there'd have the same problems as us, so unless they were born in the solar system it would be impossible.

 Not sure if this should be in speculations.

I disagree with the statement that a low iq is a plus for the military, your underestimating the stress and the equipment the military has to use today, also the decisions they have to make under fire. You don't want people with a low iq doing this. Also the iq/standard they required from doctors will probably go up or down depending on situation, I imagine they wouldn't have to picky during the First World War for example.

thats a very interesting video too, seen it before, Found it very thought provoking.

sorry op says military or doctor not military doctor. My bad.

True, a lot cheaper too, not to mention the benefits to wildlife. This trend towards vegetarian and vegan foods will help too.

Easier to hit the sun than a black hole!! Well that's even more interesting, but does make sense. Cheers

This is something I've thought was true for along time- that if you were travelling at 99.9% the speed of light then from your perspective it would take you about 30 years to travel across the entire universe. If this is true then does this mean that travelling at half that speed would take 60 years? Or does it only take effect at a certain speed. Because if this was true wouldn't that mean that travelling to the nearest star at just say 10% the speed of light would take about a week if you were on the ship?

Ah yeah "duh", should of made the connection, was reading about that not long ago as well!! 

What about the carbon from the carbon capture though, would this be a good source material for graphene? I was thinking about global warming and I think carbon capture technology would have a bigger impact than renewables.

Hi, will it be possible to make diamonds using super strength magnets? I was thinking about being able to make diamonds like thin sheets of glass instead of really small like they do now. If you could, could you make the diamond so thin it would be flexible? I was also thinking about all the applications of mass produced diamonds and maybe it would be good way to use the carbon from carbon capture programs. What do you think?

Ok good, thanx for that, I get it now, it would fly into the sun eventually, and it could orbit around a black hole, it depends on its trajectory. Those links were really great too. Zapatos really nailed it for me though.

I thought if you fired off a probe towards the sun it wouldn't just into to it, it wouldn't get anywhere near it, but if you fired a probe into a black hole obviously it would go straight into it, why the difference? 

It was a thread I'll look for it, I know a black hole is inescapable but why isn't it easy to get something to the surface of the sun using the same principles as a black hole, why doesn't the sun just pull you straight in, albeit a lot slower, like a black hole does. Thanx for link. Will read.

Ok bad word, not land but use the sun as a nuclear waste dump, overcoming the gravity ( I think) would make it so difficult it would be pointless, but then why doesn't the same principle apply to a black hole, I don't actually want to throw waste into a black hole that was just an example. I thought that this meant that a rotating black hole would be like trying to dump nuclear waste into the sun but a non rotating black hole would just suck you straight in.

Sorry poor explanation, I was reading a thread which explained why it would be difficult and pointless to dump nuclear waste into the sun, basically the sun would just cause you too orbit around super fast the only way to counter this would require so much energy it would be pointless. I was wondering would a black hole have the same effect, so if you flew near one it would more likely cause you to orbit around. I know it sounds dumb but why is it hard to "land" on the sun but not a black hole, is it because it's so massive. Thanx for reply btw.

Hi I was reading about how putting nuclear waste into the sun would be pointless, due to orbital mechanics, and needing more energy than it take to leave the solar system, but what about black holes? does that mean it would actually be a lot more difficult to get into a black hole than people realise, my head says no but surely the same principle applys?, does it apply to spinning black holes only. Confused, please help.