Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Add Reply RSS Feed

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Do you think human race can live in outer space?, Similar to Earth?

views
     
joyyy
post Oct 30 2009, 11:01 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,394 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
QUOTE(Awakened_Angel @ Oct 30 2009, 09:12 AM)
thanks for remind me that.. makes me wonder... with presence of sun, we feel warmth.. but with absence of sun, itll feeze like pluto.. why??

which mean the universe is cold?? maybe minus few hundred C?
*
The temperature of the Universe is 2.726 Kelvin. That's 2.726 degrees above absolute zero. As comparison, liquid oxygen boils at 50K.
The temperature is a result of the remanence of the energy of the big bang, which happened about 13.7 billion years ago. Just to compare, the temperature of the universe when it was just 1/100s old was a hundred billion(100,000,000,000) Kelvins.
As time passed and the universe expanded, the temperatures cooled to a lowly 2.7Kelvin. smile.gif
joyyy
post Oct 30 2009, 06:49 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,394 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
QUOTE(Awakened_Angel @ Oct 30 2009, 06:09 PM)
first.. UNLIMITED energy does not exist.. to be precise... quantity of energy is for human to use.. and it`ll take billions of years before we start to worry on energy shortage....

how energy is produce is like asking the first cause... the conservation of energy equation say energy cannot be created nor destroyed...

so, the energy in this universe is "created" somehow... we`ll just abandon this....

and we human didnt actually create energy.. like fuel, electric etc... we never create them...

we just harvest energy in different form(coal, food, sun, wind etc) and transform its form....  smile.gif
*
Adding to your explanation, because energy cannot be destroyed or created, it is impossible to achieve absolute zero, because then you're decoupling or disconnecting yourself from the rest of the universe, and that's never going to happen. smile.gif

QUOTE(pllx)
  Agreed haha. We're getting out of topic though. It would be awesome if we could populate mars. I told my bio teacher my theory of planting trees in an oxygenized dome on mars and after a long time, maybe there would be sufficient oxygen of habitation. Yeah i know it's a rough idea and the cost would be insane, but it's just a "What If?" My teacher smacked me and said i was wasting her time haha.

It certainly is possible in theory. Send large greenhouse gas-producing machineries and let them churn out gases for a couple thousand years until an atmosphere is formed.
With the presence of an atmosphere, plants or other primitive organisms can survive and produce the needed oxygen for humans. Sure, given a few thousand years I'm pretty sure this will inevitably happen. biggrin.gif
We'll be forced to, anyways when the sun starts running out of fuel in about 5 billion years =P
joyyy
post Oct 30 2009, 10:32 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,394 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
QUOTE(pllx @ Oct 30 2009, 09:08 PM)
Haha, i don't appreciate being called a kid sweat.gif I may be inexperienced and naive at times, but i attribute it to a lack of exposure and definitely not age. For that, i'd rather not reveal my age. It's like an ad hominem that can only fallaciously work against my favour in most cases. smile.gif
I asked my physics teacher what caused gravity. He wouldn't give me an answer but i found the equation that  correlates mass distance and gravity with a bit of research.  However, i simply still do not understand how an object with mass has a gravitational pull. Is it the force of attraction emitted by the nuclei of the particles that form us or something?

My question is: Do you really think humans should live in outer space, given that they are capable? What would our life be without our home planet? For what are we living when we have outlived our own planet or caused its destruction? I have a feeling that we as a species will never make it out of our solar system. Nonetheless, like any decent person i will keep an open mind smile.gif
*
The truth is physicists have no idea what causes gravity. One hypothesis is the Graviton. Think of it as electrons in a analogous electrical circuit. In an electrical circuit electrons moving around causes electrical current. Physicists have theorized that this may be the same for gravity as well.
And the reason why gravitons havent been discovered yet is because gravity is such a weak force. As a comparison, out of the four fundamental forces in the Universe, electromagnetic force is 10^25 times stronger than gravity. Being such a weak force, gravitons therefore hardly interact with matter, therefore making detection extremely hard.

And about space colonization, I think humans are very capable of adapting and are more than likely to be able to survive in a foreign planet given that they have the capability. smile.gif
joyyy
post Oct 30 2009, 10:51 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,394 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
QUOTE(Awakened_Angel @ Oct 30 2009, 10:42 PM)
but the thing is... we human lost our evolution skills... what we do is we craete something for us to adapt instead of changing ourself to adapt
*
Au contraire, the reason why we have not evolved as much as our predecessors is because there is no need to at this moment. Also, we homo sapiens have only been around for a relatively short 200,000 years, as compared to our predecessors. And yes, we do force our environment to evolve instead of ourselves. But still, we humans are a biological spesies and when the need comes for it, believe me we will evolve and adapt to our new environment. smile.gif
joyyy
post Oct 30 2009, 11:38 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,394 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
QUOTE(Awakened_Angel @ Oct 30 2009, 11:22 PM)
i don think we are better off 100,000 years ago biologically.. what we see the difference now is that there is a set of education system and documented knowledge passed down from generation....

if you put a 22th century baby on ice age and age age baby in 22th century and let them grow.. i bet the out come is the same  biggrin.gif
*
Education and knowledge does not play a big part in evolution. Sure, we can use science to accelerate evolution, but evolution depends on the surroundings.
Also, unlike some animals, human evolution isn't something that is significant in 1 or 2 generations. Put a baby there and it's great-great-greatgrandchild may be different from it. smile.gif
I read an article recently about humans today and homonids hundreds of thousands of years ago. Those homonids could easily run at 37kph, which would mean that they had a more muscular frame. And they needed it, be it to hunt or run away from predators.
And then there's us homo sapiens, with much less muscle mass simply because we do not need so much, but with much bigger brains than our predecessors. =)
We do evolve. biggrin.gif
joyyy
post Nov 1 2009, 06:35 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,394 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
QUOTE(Awakened_Angel @ Nov 1 2009, 05:22 PM)
yes.. i once asked my wife who studied pure bio in uni.. ask her to differentiate mutation, adaptation and evolution....  rclxub.gif

can you explain it here??
*
I would say that they're all the same thing, only differently perceived.
Evolution absolutely depends on mutation, because that's the only way new genes are created, be it useful mutation or harmful mutation. And evolution is essentially adaptation to the surroundings.
But then again I could be wrong. Someone clarify this please? biggrin.gif
joyyy
post Nov 8 2009, 02:21 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,394 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
QUOTE(St.Paul @ Nov 8 2009, 06:18 AM)
One day we will. Probably in 1000 years time.
*
I would think that humans would need much more than 1000 years to evolve to live in outer space.
1000 years on a cosmic scale is like a microsecond.

1000/13,700,000,000 = 7 microseconds =P
joyyy
post Nov 13 2009, 08:07 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,394 posts

Joined: Apr 2007
QUOTE(GunBlaDeR @ Nov 12 2009, 09:55 PM)
Regarding the link posted by the Thread Starter:
http://www.northernlife.ca/News/LocalNews/...07-06-moon.aspx
Is this statement true? And to what extend does Mars has sufficient water supply?
*
It is true that Mars does have water, though if you compare it with Earth that amount is nothing.
But life as we know it depends on liquid water, which is not present on the surface of Mars. The pressure and temperature of Mars is far too low such that any liquid water will freeze and undergo sublimation.
When the guy in that article said "sufficient", he probably meant sufficient for a small batch of pioneers, assuming that they can get it into liquid form. smile.gif

This post has been edited by joyyy: Nov 13 2009, 08:07 AM
« Next Oldest · PhD School · Next Newest »
 

Add ReplyOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
 0.0449sec    0.80    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 30th November 2025 - 05:17 AM
All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)
Removal Request
Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025  IPS, Inc.