500? I mean it’s entirely possible in the next 200 or so years. Tunnelling is a pretty good industry for some nations, and is likely to only improve considering the protection an underground structure would offer on the Moon and Mars

And that would be 8 generations at worst. At the moment, major hurdle is getting a manned mission to Callisto

Hmmm, true.

Does our understanding of Hawking radiation bake in the possibility of a singularity-free black hole (subject to interior vacuum energy) or the assumption there is a singularity (no interior vacuum energy)?

Does an expanding event horizon contradict the idea of a singularity? ie how does a point of infinite density permit a variable horizon if new mass doesn’t alter the density?

The moon is a training ground

> Why is there so many Stars around us if we can't reach any?

Open-world game developers know the importance of an "infinite horizon".

Please - the simulation is having hard enough a time generating one planet for us as it is!

[removed]

I think its simple. You don't need to understand to appreciate all that space is, much like you don't need to be 200 years old to enjoy life.

I’ve had some really good experiences seeing meteors. To me they’re like “Lady Luck”. If I went out expecting a meteor, nada. Standing around w friends? Suddenly, “Wowdidyouseethat?”

Saw one in the 80s that lit the sky blue. Pine trees were green. That was reported on the Radio news. Someone called in thinking the Soviets nuked the Southwest.

Buddies and I saw one that left a smoking trail in the sky. HS Astronomy club. A lot of “Aw Man! No Way!” Then there was a fight over binoculars.

Craziest experience was w my wacky cousin canoeing a river in Northern Minnesota at night. We were supposed to leave at noon but he wasn’t good at planning. So in the dark AuGust night we paddled. So dark the stars shown w colors. Looking down I could see shooting stars in the reflection on the water.

So serene. So special.

Until we canoed right into a drifting muskrat. Then we all freaked out.

I don’t think so. With our current understanding of black holes, there seems to be no sort of peak energy one black hole can handle, they just keep growing depending on how much mass it can absorb.

Another thing is hawking radiation. As we understand it, black holes do decay, just very slowly. Because it’s theorized that supermassive black holes will completely decay in a relatively similar amount of time as a smaller black hole, you can hypothesize that the more mass leads to more hawking radiation EDIT: checked and the smaller a black hole, the quicker it does decay.

> 500 generations

10,000 years? I think you err far to the pessimistic side.

The second is closer to the modern scientific definition. And the part that’s problematic is “tested by further observation”. You’ve given a pretty vague analogy that can’t be (reasonably) tested because it isn’t really a full fledged idea. I can ask something like “what if dark matter is made of the souls of the damned” but unless I present a clear idea of what that means (clear enough to obtain potential effects) it’s not really science in the modern sense.

Because the words I typed are not labels for the underlying math. Words that ARE just labels for complex underlying math are significantly different from words that aren't.

Are you really going to be this facetious?

How am I able to understand what you mean? Those are just words correct?

I disagree with the hypothesis definition, when I look it up it says: "Something taken to be true for the purpose of argument or investigation; an assumption."

"A tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation."

You have an excellent point otherwise. Thank you.

I mention Callisto specifically as I think it is a far better prospect than Mars. And the only advantage the Moon has is proximity to Earth.

[deleted]

I think we could do it right now if we committed ourselves as a species. Which we won't, and aren't even remotely close to, so.... I'd say it entirely hinges on commercializing space. When it becomes profitable to engage in space based endeavors is when colonization of other places enters the realm of realistic.

Yes and it is WONDERFUL! We go once a year just to camp and look at the stars. Just be sure to check their calendar of events if you want to avoid people… their events are fun btw!

How many generations of work and technological advancement in physics, engineering, biology, chemistry, materials science, medicine, etc. do you think it would take to colonize Callisto? Off the top of my head I would say 500 generations.

Agreed! I may have been too harsh originally. Well put.

Stop trying to understand physics through words instead of math. The words are meaningless without knowing the math that they are meant to describe. The words themselves are not understanding.

If you’ve spent years absorbing this information and this is the limit of what you know, you haven’t been very efficient. This is neither a theory nor a hypothesis (at least, not in the modern scientific sense). It’s “not even wrong”.

I know it’s frustrating to not understand something you wish to understand, even after putting in some cursory effort (usually, watching some YouTube videos or pop science documentary) but you have to remember that people spend years of their life intensely studying this stuff and learn actual material in that time-not just vague analogies. But if you want to have interesting ideas, you have to actually understand the underlying material. For example, can you derive why a specific rotation curve implies a specific density distribution? That’s basic undergraduate physics (and obviously important for dark matter studies).

No doubt. Any talk of colonization assumes a highly functioning orbital economy well in place around Earth.

[removed]

Assuming we get extremely good at building habitats, maybe.