## Wednesday, June 14, 2006

### Hawking: colonize space or die

Our famous and beloved colleague Stephen Hawking has indirectly supported Bush's NASA plans and urged the humanity

to avoid a manmade virus that will otherwise destroy all life.

In 20 years, we should be on the Moon. In 40 years, we should be on Mars. However, because the planets in the Solar system suck, we must clearly plan to see other stars with nicer planets.

Hawking is just getting started with a children book project with his daughter.

Equally famous and beloved Alan Guth views the space as the "ultimate life boat" at the 100-year timescale, but meanwhile, he proposes to build an underground base in Antarctica. Given the huge number of militant crackpots and others above the ground, it could be a good idea for me to apply for asylum there. ;-)

#### 1 comment:

1. Hawking's idea is an interesting one, although he is probably NOT the first one proposing it. However, the idea will NOT work, and there is factual evidence to prove it does NOT work.

The reason goes like this: There must be extra-territorial life some where else in the universe and it is presume there must be lots of them. Some ETs must be far advanced in their civilization than ours. And they must also have experience the kind of danger we are facing today, during their development path. They probable also have a Dr. Hawking proposing to go to outer space and colonize the universe in order to survive.

If the ET's plan was put into action, and was successful. There is every reason to believe they would have already colonized most if not all of the places in the universe that has useful resources or otherwise suitable for habitation, including our own earth. The fact that the earth has not been colonized, and remain independent, and remain isolated and never received any ET visit, says to the fact that NONE of the numerous ETs out there was able to carry out the Hawking plan successfully and colonize the space!

My point is the earth is a huge place and has plenty of resouce for us to survive and live for billions of years, in a sustainable way. The only problem is we human are greedy and breed ourselves in an un-controlable way just like rats or cock roaches. The earth is littered with too many human beings every where. And that's the whole reason for all kinds of crisises and disasters. If the human population is reduced 10 folds, a lot of problems can be resolved much easier.

Another way of thinking about it is, consider the earth as a huge spaceship. If all the resources and provisions can not sustain the people living in this huge spaceship. What reason do you tink if we put 12 astronauts in a 100 feet spaceship, and they can living within all limited provisions in the spaceship for decades in order to reach the next star system?

And even these dozen people do survive the long journey and managed to find an earth like planet. What makes the situation better than earth when in a couple thousand years they breed into another 6 billion population and occupy the whole planet and exhaust all its resources?

Limiting human itself is the only plausible way of achieving sustainability. If we do not impose a limit ourself, the nature will do the dirty job. The nature always does, either in the form of natural disasters or resource wars between human beings.