IEET > Vision > Galactic > Directors > George Dvorsky > Futurism
Stross: Space colonization is not in our future
George Dvorsky   Jun 19, 2007   Sentient Developments  

I’m sure most readers of this blog have stumbled upon Charlie Stross‘s recent post, The High Frontier, Redux, in which he argues that space colonization is not in our future.

(Charlie’s post was BoingBoing’d and Slashdotted and of this writing has over 452 comments!). He crunches the numbers and offers some interesting food for thought about the limitations and absurdities of space travel and colonization.

He says,

This is not to say that interstellar travel is impossible; quite the contrary. But to do so effectively you need either (a) outrageous amounts of cheap energy, or (b) highly efficient robot probes, or (c) a magic wand. And in the absence of (c) you’re not going to get any news back from the other end in less than decades. Even if (a) is achievable, or by means of (b) we can send self-replicating factories and have them turn distant solar systems into hives of industry, and more speculatively find some way to transmit human beings there, they are going to have zero net economic impact on our circumstances (except insofar as sending them out costs us money).

I recommend that you read article; there’s lots to consider.

That said, I agree with Stross that space colonization is not in our future—or anybody’s future for that matter. But I disagree with him as to why this is the case (this is largely what I’ll be speaking about at TransVision 2007 next month).

First, Stross’s analysis fails to take into account future civilization types; I get the sense that he takes a normative view of today’s technological and economic realities and projects them into the future. This is surprising, not only because he’s an outstanding science fiction visionary, but also because he’s a transhumanist who has a very good grasp on what awaits humanity in the future (in fact, he was the WTA‘s transhumanist of the year for 2004). Specifically, he should be taking into account the possibility of post-Singularity, Drexlerian, Kardashev Type II civilizations. Essentially, we’re talking about post-scarcity civilizations with access to molecular assembling nanotechnology, radically advanced materials, artificial superintelligence, and access to most of the energy available in the solar system.

Stross also too easily dismisses how machine intelligences, uploaded entities and AGI will impact on how space could be colonized. He speculates about biological humans being sent from solar system to solar system, and complains of the psychological and social hardships that could be inflicted on an individual or crew. He even speculates about the presence of extraterrestrial pathogens that undoubtedly awaits our daring explorers. This is a highly unlikely scenario. Biological humans will have no role to play in space. Instead, this work will be done by robots and quite possibly cyborgs (which is how the term ‘cyborg’ came to exist in the first place).

Stross does mention the possibility of probes being sent out, but again, fails to account for the economic benefits of self-replicating probes. He notes the extreme distances involved in space travel—another way of saying that it takes too long. Given the alternative mind-space and clock-space that a machine mind could inhabit, time is not a very helpful variable when discussing the limitations of space travel.

Spacecraft propulsion was another topic that Stross addressed. My feeling is that he should have spent more time analyzing some of the more radical possibilities for star-to-star space travel. I’m fairly convinced this is not an inhibitor to space colonization.

Finally, Stross’s analysis invokes far too much sociology and rationalization. Cost and time scales aside, he did not take into account the drive for scientific advancement and exploration. The search for life on other planets is a rather important one—it’s a mystery we seem rather hell-bent on solving. Moreover, it’s difficult to predict what private individuals or groups may do on their own. I can totally imagine an eccentric and motivated crew that organizes a mission into space.

As for my own arguments against space colonization, like I said, that’s the topic I’ll be addressing at TV07.

George P. Dvorsky serves as Chair of the IEET Board of Directors and also heads our Rights of Non-Human Persons program. He is a Canadian futurist, science writer, and bioethicist. He is a contributing editor at io9 — where he writes about science, culture, and futurism — and producer of the Sentient Developments blog and podcast. He served for two terms at Humanity+ (formerly the World Transhumanist Association). George produces Sentient Developments blog and podcast.


The space colonization of the future in Mars planet, in Saturn Titan moon, the earth moon and another planets no is a generosity for the human specie because the human is a enemy of the nature, of this Earth Planet, of the animals and life of his planet, i feel that is not correct colonize another planets in the future, my mind see a devil in the space colonization, i believe that human specie must accept his extinction, Stephen Hawkings has been a mistake of the future of the humanity, because he needed ask this question ¿Who is the human specie for escape of his extinction if he must pay expensive the damage that make to his palnet, nature and animals? in the day of today there are things most importants that save of our planet than space colonization of the future!
make a small solar panel

Lots of magic wands (from “transhumanism, to “post scarcity”)  in this article. I don’t think it is very reasonable to bring such ideas here, but that’s just me. I don’t believe in those theories, and i wonder why i should. That they are seducing for an ape mind (and as wikipedia articles) doesn’t make them even probable.

YOUR COMMENT Login or Register to post a comment.

Next entry: Centenarian Birthdays, Abstractions, and Presuming to Exist

Previous entry: Long-Term Deposits