PDA

View Full Version : It's the year 2100- how far in space will humans have gone?



banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-Feb-25, 02:58 PM
It's the year 2100- how far in space will humans have gone? By that I mean- actual human footprints on a planetary body/moon...

note- tried to add none of the above- ran out of options- tell us anyways

Chuck
2005-Feb-25, 03:07 PM
I picked Mars but we might have asteroid mining by then. None of the choices would be too surprising, though. The future can be so uncertain, especially decades ahead.

banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-Feb-25, 03:10 PM
actualy it would be interesting to see who the big space powers will be in the next hundred years or so...wouldn't be surprised if China or Japan outpaces the USA at some point...who knows...India?

jfribrg
2005-Feb-25, 03:22 PM
I voted for the Moon. It takes a while for technology to catch up. 115 years elapsed between Columbus' first voyage and the establishment of Jamestown. I think it will take longer than that before we have the infrastructure necessary to go to Mars.

Doodler
2005-Feb-25, 03:24 PM
I went with Mars, though it will probably be an Apollo style mission. I think we'll definitely be on the moon permanently in a hundred years.

Swift
2005-Feb-25, 03:28 PM
I went with Mars, though it will probably be an Apollo style mission. I think we'll definitely be on the moon permanently in a hundred years.
My thoughts exactly, except that I'd give a permanent lunar base a 50/50 chance. I'd guess we (humans, not necessarily the US) will make a once or twice visit to Mars, and then like the moon, walk away from the project. I also think it is possible that the world's governments give up on space completely, except for near-Earth-orbit satellites.

Sorry, but I'm in a dark mood today. :-?

ToSeek
2005-Feb-25, 03:50 PM
I was an optimist and voted for Titan. It was only 66 years between the Wright Brothers and Apollo 11, after all.

jt-3d
2005-Feb-25, 04:08 PM
Well, now here's a thread I can get my drunken teeth into. You want to know where we'll be in 100 years? Right where we are now.
People have developed an aversion to risk. They simply don't want to accidentially get killed and no agency wants to risk anybody getting killed on their dime, for fear of getting sued. No, we'll be sitting right here on our 'safe' planet with our warm fires and our bear skins thinking how great things are with this interweb and microwavable TV dinners. All the while other accidents, which are no longer newsworthy, will continue to snuff out lives at a rate that makes the space program look like bumper cars. No, I doubt lawyers will even let us get back to the moon. Only a direct threat to our cushy existance will get everybody to realise sometimes you just have to take a chance. We've lost the will to explore and it ain't coming back.

Sorry, I didn't see the 'right here' option so I didn't vote.

banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-Feb-25, 04:20 PM
actually I meant for the Earth's moon only to mean status quo- ie. we've already put our footprint's there...

jt-3d
2005-Feb-25, 04:22 PM
Status quo, thanks, voted. I missed that point.

banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-Feb-25, 04:27 PM
Wouldn't it be amazing though if somehow...a Zephram Cochrane came along and invented a warp drive in his garage? I mean...ToSeek pointed out that we went from the Wright Brothers to the moon in a mere 66 years...that was a quantum leap of sorts...maybe lightning can happen again.

Argos
2005-Feb-25, 05:37 PM
At this pace, no further than Mars.

Jpax2003
2005-Feb-25, 06:19 PM
I voted for the Moon. It takes a while for technology to catch up. 115 years elapsed between Columbus' first voyage and the establishment of Jamestown. I think it will take longer than that before we have the infrastructure necessary to go to Mars.Even if you use that 115 year figure from 1969 you still get to Mars before 2100, call it ca. 2085. Infrastructure is not a necessity for a one time mission.

Van Rijn
2005-Feb-25, 08:11 PM
I picked Titan, though I consider that a conservative choice. It isn't a technology issue so much as an economic one, though technology will make it MUCH easier. Within the next century, barring the collapse of civilization, I fully expect there to be an extensive non-government space infrastructure in the Earth-Moon system and at Mars. There certainly would be human exploration far beyond that. We would also see the beginning of true interstellar robot probes - probably microprobes similar in concept to Starwisp.

paulie jay
2005-Feb-26, 01:35 AM
I said Earth's moon only - though I'd love it to be anything but! And I don't mean colonisation either. I just think that as time goes by and costs get higher, governments will be less and less inclined to devote public money to space programs. I don't agree with it - but that's how I see it.

Van Rijn
2005-Feb-26, 01:44 AM
Well, I agree that government itself won't get us much farther than the moon in manned exploration, but why do you assume only government would be involved? While manned exploration at the extremes may or may not directly involve private concerns, as the infrastructure is developed, government won't be as concerned about developing the hardware themselves as using what is already available. The costs would be dramatically lower.

paulie jay
2005-Feb-26, 01:47 AM
Because a fair whack of the money needed for space exploration comes from government grants, that's why!

Ilya
2005-Feb-26, 11:19 PM
I picked Mars, and also more for social/economic reasons than technological ones. I simply do not believe that government-funded manned spaceflight is sustainable for much longer -- the fact that so many space enthusiasts ARE HOPING FOR A COLD WAR with China is a very telling point. Whoever steps on Mars first will do it with private fundings -- and that's a LONG way off.

I also think that biotechnology and genetic engineering will be a much bigger field through 21st Century than aerospace -- and it is entirely possible that first people to land on Mars will be genetically modified for spaceflight.

Inferno
2005-Feb-27, 11:27 PM
If we all put our heads together and really focused big efforts to get to Mars, I have no doubt it could be done. But without a pressing need to go there (other than because it's there), I'd say this century will be the century of robotic probes.

mopc
2005-Mar-01, 02:15 AM
YOU GUYS CAN'T BE SERIOUS!!! :cry:


Of course man will have the ability and the willpower to travel beyond the solar system by 2100. Just imagine transportation in 1900 compared to 2000. By 2030 we may have fusion power, by 2060 we can have highly efficient fusion power and about a hundred million (no kidding) times more energy available to us from He3 mining in the Giant Gas Planets.

Entirely new physics and propulsion systems might be a reality by 2050 if not earlier. I don't know if we will have reached other solar systems by 2100, but we will be on the way.

The future is unlimited. 2200 is unimaginable.

geokstr
2005-Mar-01, 04:08 PM
I hope it's the stars, but I saw an interesting take on interstellar travel a while back (can't recall where).

The time it takes to get from one star to the next, and the pace of technological progress, are such that every new probe or ship going interstellar will be caught and passed by future missions. The first ones to get there will be waiting, possibly for hundreds of years, for all the earlier missions to arrive.

Doodler
2005-Mar-01, 06:55 PM
I hope it's the stars, but I saw an interesting take on interstellar travel a while back (can't recall where).

The time it takes to get from one star to the next, and the pace of technological progress, are such that every new probe or ship going interstellar will be caught and passed by future missions. The first ones to get there will be waiting, possibly for hundreds of years, for all the earlier missions to arrive.

I recall something similar, its why interstellar missions aren't being considered until the travel time can be reduced under the 100 year mark.

As it stands now, we still get decent science out of probes working some 30 years after they are launched. Until you can get the travel time down enough that you can launch a robust probe that will last long enough to get there and return information on technology that won't be completely antiquated (to me, there's a difference between outdated and antiquated. Example, my old 486 clone computer is just outdated, its far from antiquated like say, ENIAC) to those who are around to monitor it.

Van Rijn
2005-Mar-01, 09:44 PM
Even with advanced fusion drives, manned flights to other solar systems wouldn't be easy or fast, and would take lots of energy and resources. So unless something really new (and obviously, unpredictable) comes up, I'd consider that pretty questionable in the century time frame.

Probes are a different story, as are advanced space based telescopes. A very low mass probe could be accelerated to a good fraction of the speed of light on a light beam. I see that to be a real possibility within a century.

I gave up on government space programs a couple of decades ago, at least in regards to developing the infrastructure needed for a real space transportation system. Aside from robot probes and manned showboating, we won't see much more out of them directly. If we are going to get into space in a big way, it will be through business, not government. It isn't a technology issue as much as it is a question of market incentives. With a century to work with, I see that as being pretty much inevitable, barring a complete collapse of civilization.

When a vacation at a Lunar resort costs about what a vacation in Tahiti does today (and I do expect that within a century), there will be people walking on Titan.

Lurker
2005-Mar-02, 01:31 AM
You guys have got it all wrong!! We may send a few more missions to the moon and maybe even get to Mars, but that's gunna be the end of it. By the time 2100 comes around, we're gunna be able to feed digital signals directly into the brain. Virtual reality will be more realistic than we can possibly imagine.

People will travel through space and to the planets and have fantastic adventures, but no one will ever leave the planet again. Risk will be something to be minimized so that one can live the longest life possible in their own virtual world. In that world they don't have to worry about infirmity, they never have to grow old until the last moment of life.

Well someone had to be the devil in this thread!! 8)

Lord Jubjub
2005-Mar-02, 02:40 AM
Actual human footprints won't happen unless planets are found around Alpha Centauri--and that's only a faint chance.

But I hold Titan as a placeholder for any other body other than Mars. yeah, someone's going to put a footprint on a planetary body other Earth, Moon or Mars before 2100. If only for the sake of doing it.

Jpax2003
2005-Mar-02, 07:22 AM
You guys have got it all wrong!! We may send a few more missions to the moon and maybe even get to Mars, but that's gunna be the end of it. By the time 2100 comes around, we're gunna be able to feed digital signals directly into the brain. Virtual reality will be more realistic than we can possibly imagine.

People will travel through space and to the planets and have fantastic adventures, but no one will ever leave the planet again. Risk will be something to be minimized so that one can live the longest life possible in their own virtual world. In that world they don't have to worry about infirmity, they never have to grow old until the last moment of life.

Well someone had to be the devil in this thread!! 8)How do you know this has not already happened and we are not already in a virtual reality? Do we take the blue pill?