Is the human race doomed for existence?

[Knowledge_Seeker]

When the sun dies out, it is likely that we will also die out. Unless the human race, with a vast amount of time (4 billion years) figures out how to sustain life without the sun, or how we can reach another star system.

Do you think in that timespan we can discover how to live without the sun, or travel to a distant star system?

Because to travel at the speed of light, from what i know, you have to be pure energy. and the nearest star (im not sure if it has a planetary system) is 4 light years away.

But then again the andromeda galaxy is speeding towards us at an incredibly fast rate, but the distance is still vast.

[baric]

We will wipe ourselves out long before the Sun dies out and long before we figure out how to safely travel to other star systems.

Look at our track record... it's not too promising! A large segment of our population wants to kill people over cartoons :(

[Knowledge_Seeker]

i was going to start another post about that because i didnt want to make this one too long, but i agree

[Nereid]

I'm not sure what this thread has to do with astronomy (other than linking a very long time to the life of the Sun) ... so I'm moving it.

[Metricyard]

We will wipe ourselves out long before the Sun dies out and long before we figure out how to safely travel to other star systems.

Look at our track record... it's not too promising! A large segment of our population wants to kill people over cartoons :(

Sadly, I have to agree.

It's not the Sun dieing out that worries me, it's the 1000's of little suns sitting in missle silos thats got me worried.

[snarkophilus]

Even if we don't kill each other off (and I actually doubt we will, unlike seemingly everyone else), and even if we make it another four billion years, we won't be recognizable as humans.

I think we could manage interstellar travel in that time, anyway. Heck, I'm willing to say that if we had the drive to do so, we could build a decent colony ship right now. Spin it to simulate gravity, use interstellar hydrogen as fuel, et cetera. We have the technology, it's just prohibitively expensive right now. But it probably could be done, given the impetus.

And what would technology be like after four billion years of progress? Who knows? In that time, a star burning out might not be a big deal.

[jkmccrann]

Unfortunately, I think its far too early to tell.

Based on a modest rate of progress over the coming millions of years, we will easily be able to achieve interstellar travel. To what end? I do not know.

I agree there is a good chance we will wipe ourselves out, but I would doubt that would happen anytime soon. It could be that this millennium, the 3rd Millennium, is really the key millennium for humanity in regards to its long term existence. If we can develop our technologies and make tangible progress without wiping ourselves out before then, then we can probably assume that by the end of this millennium we will no longer be restricted to one singular point, ie Earth, and probably not then restricted to a single star system either.

It really is a crucial 1000 years. If we haven't got anywhere by the time the Sun destroys itself, well, do we really deserve any better? Given that would indicate our civilisation had been stagnating for eons upon eons, I think if we were still around to be wiped out by the Sun it would almost be a kind of `civilisation euthanasia'

[Van Rijn]

Even if we don't kill each other off (and I actually doubt we will, unlike seemingly everyone else), and even if we make it another four billion years, we won't be recognizable as humans.


Yep. I don't see any reason to assume the human race will destroy itself. However, you can't just throw numbers like this around without thinking about some of the implications. About 500 million years ago, we were pond scum. Everything was pond scum. I am hopeful that something will exist in a billion years range that could be traced back to us. I would not expect it to be anything we would recognize as human, however. Actually, I would be very sad if we were forever doomed to be no more than we are now.

As for technology, that can change radically in a single human lifetime. It is just a wee bit early to worry about what our descendants would do when the sun gets a bit warm in about a billion years, or goes red giant in about 5 billion years.

[Huevos Grandes]

Do you think in that timespan we can discover how to live without the sun, or travel to a distant star system?
As Metricyard and baric stated- it's moot, we'll have died out long before the sun burns out. The history of every preceding species on the planet alone will likely do us in: famine, climate, disease, catastrophe, dominance by another species, or some combination will be our end. Add to that man's desire to allow all manner of weak genes (alleles) to survive, abilities to make war on a grand scale, and an utter disregard for shaping our environment without destroying it, and you can pretty much count us as "doomed" now.

Because to travel at the speed of light, from what i know, you have to be pure energy. and the nearest star (im not sure if it has a planetary system) is 4 light years away.
Yes, we could probably launch ourselves to a suitable planet, using technology available in only a few hundred years. The voyage would be long, since I don't believe faster-than-light engines will ever be a reality, and once arrived, the new home would still require adaptation: either genetically to ourselves, or via "terraforming".

But then again the andromeda galaxy is speeding towards us at an incredibly fast rate, but the distance is still vast.
We're not leaving this galaxy anytime soon in the far foreseeable future... :)

[mantiss]

Before the sun goes Supergiant, the planet will be inhabitable. Current theories state that the sun will make the Earth too hot within the next billion year because of the slow increase in the sun's energetic output.

By all accounts we will already have been wiped out by then, if only at the pace we're hurting the planet right now... It would take a really MASSIVE undertaking to change things, but that is not something most people have in their way of life. They only consider their living selves. After that, they lose any interest.

I don't think we'll be around in 2000 years...

[aurora]

Snark:

Most mammalian species only last a couple of million years.

So, it's unlikely humans will be around in a billion.

[pmcolt]

Well, a billion years is still a long time. In that amount of time, we could jog to the nearest star (if only there were a wilderness trail). Or, humans could very venture into space and colonize the entire galaxy if they spread outward at an average speed of about 0.1c.

Or humans as a species could completely collapse. A billion years is still enough time for another intelligent species to take another shot at interstellar travel. They might even be a human-descended species. Or not.

[Bobunf]

To colonize the whole galaxy in a billion years wouldn’t take an average of 10% of light speed. That would get the whole galaxy colonized in only a million years. A billion years would require an average velocity of only 30 kilometers per second—in the same ballpark as New Horizon’s current velocity.

And one could literally walk to the nearest star in a billion years--5 kilometers per hour would get you there with a few million years to spare.

Bob

[jkmccrann]

To colonize the whole galaxy in a billion years wouldn’t take an average of 10% of light speed. That would get the whole galaxy colonized in only a million years. A billion years would require an average velocity of only 30 kilometers per second—in the same ballpark as New Horizon’s current velocity.

Bob

When you put it that way, yeah, it does sound easy, but that avoids considering the effects of evolution. Look at how far we've evolved in the past couple of million years - any galactic expansion is inevitably going to lead to the divergence of humanity into different species, which to me points up a very obvious fact. Humans as we know ourselves are never going to colonise the entire galaxy - its simply not possible.

What's possible is that new species - in possibly hundreds or thousands or millions of evolutionary directions may be able to effectively reach everybit of the galaxy, but calling the whole thing a human diaspora is an incredibly misleading thought to process.

[pmcolt]

^^
Oops. Million, billion, same thing right?

^
True, it would be multiple descendent species of humankind (or posthuman-extremophile-intelligent-squidkind, or uploaded-exaflop-artificial-intelligencekind, or...) that would eventually colonize the galaxy, not humans as a single species in the form that we know them. Assuming that humankind survives long enough to get the whole process started, though, there probably isn't any reason why a galaxy-colonizing project wouldn't be able to run to completion within a billion years or so.

(Unless we run into other folks who got started before we did.)

[Bobunf]

I’m don’t understand the great pessimism displayed by baric, knowledge seeker, metricyard, and even Huevos Grandes.

It seems to me that the record doesn’t suggest such pessimism:

500 million years ago (or a little earlier) pond scum is not too far off as a description of life on Earth with probably far less than a million species in existence.
50 million years ago life had gone through fantastic changes and challenges. By then there were primates, and maybe 10 million species.
5 million years ago there were hominids—the beginnings of the overgrown brain.
500 thousand years ago hominids had developed the technologies of stone tools and fire.
50 thousand years ago there was Homo Sapiens with language, art, watercraft and textiles, but probably with a population of less than a million on all of the planet.
5 thousand years ago we had agriculture, beasts of burden, the wheel, permanent population centers, writing, musical instruments, metal working, oil lamps and occupation of six continents.
500 years ago the human population was in the hundreds of millions. We had mathematics, candles, cities, large complex political organizations, rockets, the printing press, and an understanding of the size, shape and contents of the Earth.
50 years ago the human population was about three billion, and we had astronomy, the Germ Theory of Disease, the Theory of Evolution, the Atomic Theory, Relativity, democracy, X-rays, antibiotics, telecomunications, air transport, electric lights, refrigeration, automobiles, an understanding of how to set bones and of the size, shape and content of the Universe, and on and on and on. Fantastic changes.
Then, of course, there’s today with the incredible accomplishments that have taken place even within our own memories, such as space travel, the Internet, and our growing understaning of biology and genetics.

What I think one sees is an exponential increase in the capability of life on Earth—increasing at an increasing rate for over 500 million years.

Is that something to be pessimistic about?

Bob

[Knowledge_Seeker]

Is that something to be pessimistic about?


I believe that although the human race is advancing exponentially i belive that in the near future, we will be so dependant on the technologies that were created by past generations that we will forget how to use the human/thinking mind.

If you have heard about Marshall McLuhan, i believe in his "Theory of Extensions" that we will 'transfer' our human traits and needs onto technology.

For example, the pencil- extension of mind
Cars - extension of legs
Telephone - extension of ears, mouth

etc.

And this theory was made a long time ago before we developed most of our technologies. And his 'theory' has been shown to be true.

[Halcyon Dayz]

If you have heard about Marshall McLuhan... []
And this theory was made a long time ago before we developed most of
our technologies.
Now you're really making me feel old. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mcluhan):cry:

[Knowledge_Seeker]

Now you're really making me feel old. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mcluhan):cry:

Its ok to be old.........wait that wasnt helpful:think:

[V-GER]

This seems to be an on going discussion in one form or another on a number of threads so I'll say what I always do; despite our short comings, we're survivors before anything, so unless an asteroid in the ridicilous scale hits us on the head and destroys the entire globe in a split second, we'll live.

[Dragon Star]

Don't worry HD, you still have a LONG way to go my friend, I just have a lot longer.:D

I am not worried about our sun the least bit, I am more worried about the Yellowstone Supervolcano myself, most people don't even know what it is, and it HAS THE ABILITY to kill most everything on Earth, and could happen anytime within now and few thousand years. (Yes I have done my homework and I know all the facts and figures, so there is no need in lecturing me about it):)

[LurchGS]

assuming humans will be extinct because every other historical dominant species on our planet has died out is a falacy - you are equating a rational, tool building species with a set of creatures that is not our equal.

Personally, I doubt very much that we'll kill ourselves off. We may go though periods of global recession (population die-off because of some catastrophy), but if we can get off this planet with a viable set of colonies, anything that happens TO this planet will be immaterial.

We won't do much in the way of evolving, either - other than designed changes - which are not that same thing anyway. I stongly hold the view that 'once a species controls its environment, it stops evolving'

I fully expect colonies within a century, and extra-solar exploration within a millennium.

I would not be at all surprised at our decendants witnessing the 'collision' between the milky way and Andromeda

[SolusLupus]

This seems to be an on going discussion in one form or another on a number of threads so I'll say what I always do; despite our short comings, we're survivors before anything, so unless an asteroid in the ridicilous scale hits us on the head and destroys the entire globe in a split second, we'll live.

For a race evolved for survival, we focus so much on the doom and gloom... not making a point, I just find that amusing.

Other than that, I highly agree.

[Halcyon Dayz]

For a race evolved for survival, we focus so much on
the doom and gloom... not making a point, I just find that amusing.
It helps if we now what were up against.
Surprises are the big killers.

[SolusLupus]

It helps if we now what were up against.
Surprises are the big killers.

That's a good point. Though a lot of people like to talk about how helpless we are to the environment. Like how we can't protect ourselves against the "Mega Tsunami", and the "Mega Volcano", and continually being told of "it's not a matter of if, but when". God, I hate that phrase.

Still, you're right. It's a good point.

[Bobunf]

When you put it that way, yeah, it does sound easy, but that avoids considering the effects of evolution. Look at how far we've evolved in the past couple of million years - any galactic expansion is inevitably going to lead to the divergence of humanity into different species, which to me points up a very obvious fact. Humans as we know ourselves are never going to colonise the entire galaxy - its simply not possible.

What's possible is that new species - in possibly hundreds or thousands or millions of evolutionary directions may be able to effectively reach everybit of the galaxy, but calling the whole thing a human diaspora is an incredibly misleading thought to process.

We'll be the common ancestor.

Bob

[Halcyon Dayz]

For the known threads we might find solutions.
Maybe we can bleed of the gasses in the
magma under Yellowstone.
Controlled demolition of Cumbre Vieja?
We will implement an anti-meteor system.
And for the last 60 years we have managed
not to nuke ourselves.

But in the long run, the only way to guarantee
human survival is to stop keeping all our
eggs in one basket.

[jkmccrann]

assuming humans will be extinct because every other historical dominant species on our planet has died out is a falacy - you are equating a rational, tool building species with a set of creatures that is not our equal.

Personally, I doubt very much that we'll kill ourselves off. We may go though periods of global recession (population die-off because of some catastrophy), but if we can get off this planet with a viable set of colonies, anything that happens TO this planet will be immaterial.

We won't do much in the way of evolving, either - other than designed changes - which are not that same thing anyway. I stongly hold the view that 'once a species controls its environment, it stops evolving'


I have to disagree with this belief that evolution is dead and buried given our technological advancement. I agree that perhaps we're in something of a lull at the moment - we don't have any really large external threats except each other, but in any colonisation effort of the galaxy we'll be split in so many ways and communication and interaction between different parts of this reality will not be great and will not be constant. Assuming continued cross-pollination on such a large scale is an amazing assumption to make.

Besides, in our continued technological improvement, surely in centuries to come that will be at such a level that we can heavily influence our own evolution and development. Eyes in the back of the head anyone?

With the vast differences separating various branches of what was once known as human-kind I can't but see that its inevitable that there will be a great deal of divergence, and there isn't a thing wrong with that.

I agree that as long as we're confined to this globe, our evolution has basically stopped in its tracks, given the inter-connectedness of the entire world these days, but that won't last forever. Either we'll come to a grisly end or we'll make it off-world and out of this Solar System.

Apart from that point, which I strongly believe in, I do agree with your other points. Here's hoping we're making significant progress by the tail-end of this millennium. :)

[SolusLupus]

I have to disagree with this belief that evolution is dead and buried given our technological advancement. I agree that perhaps we're in something of a lull at the moment - we don't have any really large external threats except each other, but in any colonisation effort of the galaxy we'll be split in so many ways and communication and interaction between different parts of this reality will not be great and will not be constant. Assuming continued cross-pollination on such a large scale is an amazing assumption to make.


Well, it might not even be "natural" evolution. If different colonies end up on different worlds and have no cross-communication, ethics and morals will change on the worlds. Different worlds will have different views on many subjects -- including genetic engineering, cybernetic implants, bioroids, robotics, HOW, exactly, to change the environment, etc. Some groups might not even think it's "morally acceptable" to terraform the environment they live in! This would lead to some interesting differences between lifestyles, not to mention forced evolution (genetic engineering, possibly cybernetics).

Hell, one "species" of Ex-Homo Sapiens might end up merely downloading themselves into computers. When they "give birth" with another personality set ("male" and "female" would become arbitary distinctions then), they might merely "copy" parts of their personality into one subset, and call it a child.

Though that's an interesting idea. Would such a species of ex-living now-AI end up being classified as "living"? They can bear new life (or at least, new consciousness), and they think...

[worzel]

Don't forget that although other systems are light years away, if we travel fast enough (and still below c) it won't take that long to get to them even though years would pass here on earth while we're going. Theorectically you could be on the other side of the galaxy in minutes without ever going faster than light, it's just that if you come back to tell your mates about it they'll be dead already.

[pmcolt]

For a race evolved for survival, we focus so much on the doom and gloom... not making a point, I just find that amusing.


Well, the question started out as "can the human race travel to another star system or find an alternate energy source before the sun dies out", which is easily doable given the timescale. So naturally, the next question is "will the human race survive that long," which brought about all of the doom and gloom, as well as the talk about future human evolution.

Besides, we are geared for survival, and only the paranoid survive. You can't avoid disaster if you never see it coming. ;)

[farmerjumperdon]

There's that word again. We are a species (at least I hope that is what is intended in this conversation), not a race.

[Halcyon Dayz]

In this context the words mean the same thing.
Homo sapiens sapiens, that's us. (Or most of us) ;)

[Knowledge_Seeker]

You can't avoid disaster if you never see it coming. ;)

Very good point.

You have to be prepared for the future. You need to see the pros and cons. But I can certainly say that as a species, we have a pretty good track record, so there seems to be a bright future for us.

To bad I wont be alive to see all of this unfolding...but at least i have a whole life ahead of me! MUHAHAHAHA

[LurchGS]

I agree with FJD - race != species (even though the dictionary disagrees with both of us)

And Nicholas pointed out that I'd said that evolution is dead, as far as humanity is concerned - not that intentional design changes are. I strongly think we'll design different humans in the not too distant future - to better cope with environments I'd rather avoid. It's far, far, cheaper to change us than it is to change a planet's ecosystem

[HenrikOlsen]

You're not thinking clearly if you think evolution isn't still working.
Removing some causes of death doesn't stop selection for survival/breeding, it just selects for other things.
When you're saying evolution is dead, what you're actually doing is making a value judgement on the traits selected on at the moment, ie. you're saying that humans are currently selected for traits you may think of as bad, such as making lots of money and keeping your kids out of the army in times of war1.
Evolution never judges traits by any other scale than procreation, and it's therefore still very much at work, though you may dislike the direction it's taking us.

Remember also that large parts of the species is currently being selected for the ability to survive on very little food and/or immunity to HIV and birdflu, they may well end up being the ancestors to the humans 30 kyears from now:)

1 These are examples of traits that are currently selected for, I'm not saying you specifically think those examples are bad.