[extropy-chat] 10th Planet Discovered

[Eugen Leitl]

On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 10:47:56AM -0500, Brent Neal wrote:

> >Sustainable colonization is equivalent to local fabbing. The launch
> >capacities are only a bottleneck if your seed size is not small. Not a
> >problem with small scale technology, especially nanotechnology.
> 
> Your argument is almost circular. You assume colonization as a fait 

Self-replication/bootstrap *is* a feedback circle, so it's unsurprising if
its discussion appears superficially tautological. It ain't, this circle is
more like an upwards spiral. It's going somewhere, despite appearances of
being trapped on a circular track.

> accompli, essentially. You also (apparently from your previous email 
> on the subject) assume the inevitability of molecular replicators. 

Not necessarily molecular, self-replication works on all scales. But, yeah,
the smaller, the shorter the replication time, more generations/time unit, and
thus faster ramp-up rate. In terms of biomass, biofilms fatten up way faster
than whales. The replicators with the shortest replications times will win.

> I would certainly prefer that the possibility of colonizing the solar 
> system not be dependent on the development of a technology that may 
> or may not be possible, or if possible at all, be centuries away.  

Of course replicators, even molecular replicators are possible: look into the
mirror. You're an instance of natural nanotechnology. Unfortunately limited
to a specific habitat very unlike deep space. Transfer costs are
mass-limited, ditto restructuring the habitat, so any biota which can
directly dwell in deep space will obviously own the solar periphery, even if it's
last to appear on the scene.  

Your projected timeline of centuries appears highly unlikely. At current
level of technology human existance is not sustainable even on planetary
surfaces given the timeline you mentioned. We're currently having a race 
between the advent of AI and nanotechnology, which are both less than half 
a century away, and will completely rewrite the rules. I.e. they rule out
sustained existance of people of conventional bauplan.

> We have the technology -right now- to colonize the inner system, 

We don't have the technology. We don't have stable closed-loop ecosystems,
nor automatic means of fabrication -- not even teleoperated means of
fabrication on a rock a lightsecond away. Is that pathetic, or what?

Launch costs to LEO and chemical rockets limit the transfer mass and transfer
time to Mars, max (and that's pushing the envelope for monkeys in
microgravitation). Luna is doable, but there's shorter route.

> were we to bootstrap carefully, and to gain large returns from 
> doing so. Why wait for self-replicating nanomachines?

We don't have to wait, we can start with bootstrapping by
telepresence/teleoperation on the Moon. Even better, we can start down here
on Earth, in lunar simulators costing but a fraction of a single launch.

...
 
> Yes, but what does this have to do with whether this body is considered a planet or not? 

Nothing. The Inuit sea goddess (and the newly discovered 2 Mm body) is called Sedna, not
Sudna.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040315/8fa0dfcc/attachment.bin>