SciFi Colonists

[McCoy]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Well' date=' I would say that it has worked for 80,000 years, why tamper with sucess.[/quote']

Good to see you. It's been a while.

[Seenar]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Good to see you. It's been a while.

 

Thanks. The MBA program has been a killer.

[austenandrews]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Well' date=' I would say that it has worked for 80,000 years, why tamper with sucess.[/quote']

Not really. The willingness to settle for a dependable solution is just as important as the desire to push it to the limit, even though we glamorize the latter much more. I'm reminded of Charles Bronson's lecture in The Magnificent Seven: "I have never had this kind of courage. Running a farm, working like a mule every day with no guarantee anything will ever come of it. This is bravery."

[McCoy]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Thanks. The MBA program has been a killer.

Ah!

[austenandrews]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Sperm banks cannot dig ditches.

What if it's, like, a giant robot sperm bank with shovels for arms?

[bigdamnhero]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

While the American Colonies analogies are fine (and probably the best historical precedent we have), some differences to keep in mind:

 

1. Depending on how far away we're talking about, our colonists may be far more isolated that the early Americans were. There's a big difference between being a couple months travel from home, and a couple years; sending home for supplies may not be a viable option.

 

2. The environment the American colonists were going to was "untamed" but not fundamentally that different from where they came from. (Sure, Virginia is warmer than England, but not significantly warmer than Southern Europe.)

 

3. Perhaps the biggest variable is the presense/absense of intelligent native life and civilization, not to mention how they're likely to react to the arrival of the colonists. Without drifting too far OT (and without excusing or justifying anything), the Spanish colonies in Central & South America had to be far more militarized than the British colonies in North America for the simple fact that Central & South America had culturally-advanced militaristic societies which opposed their presense, while North America did not.

 

4. On the converse, if you have no intelligent native life to worry about, you can't expect any help from "friendly natives." Of course, given different biologies, having friendly natives show you what foods are safe to eat may not be a big help anyway. And then there's the question of the availability of a local labor supply. (Historically, slaves; I'm just naive enough to think we'll do better next time.)

 

5. Make sure you bring plenty of Doctors and medical lab techs. All those nasty diseases the American Colonists brought to the New World that wiped out 90% of the native population? Who's to say it won't go the other way next time?

 

 

bigdamnhero

“I'm not a liar. Not in this instance anyway.â€

[Seenar]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Not really. The willingness to settle for a dependable solution is just as important as the desire to push it to the limit' date=' even though we glamorize the latter much more. I'm reminded of Charles Bronson's lecture in The Magnificent Seven: "I have never had this kind of courage. Running a farm, working like a mule every day with no guarantee anything will ever come of it. This is bravery."[/quote']

 

I think we are talking about the same thing here. For 80,000 years the expansion has been by people wanting/being forced to move. Look at what the polynesions managed. How on Earth does someone sail to Hawii in a canoe, not even knowing it is there in the first place?

 

It are those sorts of people (i.e. that mindset) that needs to be sent across the void to other worlds. They will self-selct themselves from the billions in the world now.

[McCoy]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

And send a good balance of men and women. The frozen sperm idea sounds efficient in theory (though the costs and inefficiency of IVF mean that actually it's far less cost-efficient than the old-fashioned way)' date=' but your colonists are going to be really isolated, and experience shows that stably-mated couples deal with isolation and social friction better than mixed groups. Obviously they'd need to be realtively fit and healthy.[/quote']

I'm inclined to think we'll make tech improvements by that time, better sucess with AI making the sperm bank a more viable option, perhaps "Uterine Replicators" bringing a foetus to term without a woman having to spend nine months in pregnancy. But I would definitely want the natural method available as a back-up. Nothing wrong with an extra level of redundancy.

 

Does raise an interesting question though. Why is vetrinary AI routeinely sucessful, and human AI, not so much?

 

In the majority of cases, humans don't try AI unless there is a fertility problem, but is that enough to explain the difference?

[BlackSword]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

I think most of requirements have been covered. The ship should probably be biased towards life sciences as the first order of business will be discovering and immunizing the crew to new diseases. Also will need people with multiple talents, and good physical/genetic stock. People with good technical skills, not just for invention, but to keep equipment in good repair and setup new production facilities quickly. As mentioned, it might be best to take a two front approach, have new tech, but those capable in old tech (blacksmithing) in case of a return to fuedal technology levels. Also probably need some psychatrists to help recognize problems and hopefully solve interpersonal problems early (even with the limitations of psychology, its better than the 'All work and no play make Homer insane' option).

 

The second part is where to colonize? My vote would be for a small island where the colonists would be isolated from the majority of flora and fauna until they had a chance to be established. If its a non-eco friendly colony, then local flora can leveled to dirt, and Earth based plants and animals can be introduced. After the colony is founded and stable, then its time to start exploring the world.

[McCoy]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

The second part is where to colonize? My vote would be for a small island where the colonists would be isolated from the majority of flora and fauna until they had a chance to be established. If its a non-eco friendly colony' date=' then local flora can leveled to dirt, and Earth based plants and animals can be introduced. After the colony is founded and stable, then its time to start exploring the world.[/quote']

Unless the unfriiendly is amphibious and lives in the ocean, in which case you would have been better off choosing the local equlivent Death Valley.

 

I'm saying mine the local asteroid belt first, build a couple of O'Neil habatats, then pick out the highest point on the equator and build a beanstalk.

[Basil]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Unless the unfriiendly is amphibious and lives in the ocean, in which case you would have been better off choosing the local equlivent Death Valley.

 

I'm saying mine the local asteroid belt first, build a couple of O'Neil habatats, then pick out the highest point on the equator and build a beanstalk.

 

"Heck, why bother climbing down into that gravity well. Nasty things, g-wells; suck up propellent and for what? Nothing you can't get off a comet or planetesimal. Heck, why go down the star's g-well any deeper than the Kuiper's Belt equivalent? The Oort cloud's where 95%+ of the volitiles are, anyway."

 

Which is what I suspect will be the opinion of the interstellar colonists in the real-world's future. Because if there isn't FTL (and it seems the real world has potential FTL only in the subatomic realm), then the people who go to other stars will not be leaving from Earth, not from the asteroid belt, but from the Oort Cloud or, barely possibly, from the Kuiper's Belt. And that only after generations of living out there. They will see planets as gravity wells, with nothing they need at the bottom.

 

Which, to return to the original subject, means that whatever types of people will be needed to settle far stars will be automatically selected by generations of living in the same conditions. The only difference will be changing which star their solar mirrors are pointed at.

[Lucius]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Men need to go along to be expendable labor. In the modern world we forget how important physical strenght is in a primative setting. Sperm banks cannot dig ditches.

 

No, but machines can.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary ruminates.

[Lucius]

SciFi Colonists

 

And send a good balance of men and women. The frozen sperm idea sounds efficient in theory (though the costs and inefficiency of IVF mean that actually it's far less cost-efficient than the old-fashioned way), but your colonists are going to be really isolated, and experience shows that stably-mated couples deal with isolation and social friction better than mixed groups. Obviously they'd need to be realtively fit and healthy.

 

cheers, Mark

 

An all female group could be stably-mated.

 

Oh, and to those discussing the analogy to the colonization of the New World; The environment they came to was not exactly "untamed wilderness." North America's Eastern Seaboard had already been farmed for a long time; it was relatively empty largely because, even before the colonists came in, explorers and adventurers had exposed the population to European diseases, which wiped out whole villages. The "settlers" essentially moved into abandoned farmland.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary ruminates.

[Captain Obvious]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

What if it's' date=' like, a giant robot sperm bank with shovels for arms?[/quote']

Well, there's no reason the sperm bank shouldn't double-specialize like everyone else...

[Captain Obvious]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Make sure you bring plenty of Doctors and medical lab techs. All those nasty diseases the American Colonists brought to the New World that wiped out 90% of the native population? Who's to say it won't go the other way next time?

 

Actually, for many years, the "Virginia bug" killed so many that few people in the southern colonies lived much past 30. If there weren't so many colonists pouring in each year, the colony would have died out.

[Markdoc]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

I think we are talking about the same thing here. For 80' date='000 years the expansion has been by people wanting/being forced to move. Look at what the polynesions managed. How on Earth does someone sail to Hawii in a canoe, not even knowing it is there in the first place? .[/quote']

 

They do it by over-populating the place where they live now. Look at the archeological record in many pacific islands and it's a record of population boom and bust. Land on a new island. Breed. Eat up everything. Fight, starve, throw in a little cannibalism, start again.

 

At some point people say "Well, we're all gonna die if we stay. Let's head east and hope we find something better." Some of them did. Many of them (perhaps most) probably died of thirst on the big blue section of the map.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Does raise an interesting question though. Why is vetrinary AI routeinely sucessful' date=' and human AI, not so much?[/quote']

 

The difference in tech isn't that great - it's just that we don't care if most animal embryoblasts die (plenty more where they came from!) and that we shoot the recipient up with enough hormones to guarantee severe morning sickness.

 

With humans we are much fussier about what's permitted.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Actually' date=' for many years, the "Virginia bug" killed so many that few people in the southern colonies lived much past 30. If there weren't so many colonists pouring in each year, the colony would have died out.[/quote']

 

As indeed, Roanoke did. The first colony was decimated by disease and starvation and was evacuated. The second just vanished and is presumed to have gone the same way, the survivors, if any assimilated by local tribes. It's not the only one, either. Many more European colonies collapsed from disease and starvation than due to any sort of hostile action by the locals.

 

cheers, Mark

[Seenar]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

No, but machines can.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary ruminates.

 

Machines break down and require an infrastructure to maintain. They are not going to have it.

 

Human beings are the one great thing that can be mass produced and require no specialized maintaince.

 

We have to assume that colony will be reduced to the Iron Age in technology as the survival point. If they have to have all that technology to stay alive, then one accident will kill them.

[Seenar]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

An all female group could be stably-mated.

 

Oh, and to those discussing the analogy to the colonization of the New World; The environment they came to was not exactly "untamed wilderness." North America's Eastern Seaboard had already been farmed for a long time; it was relatively empty largely because, even before the colonists came in, explorers and adventurers had exposed the population to European diseases, which wiped out whole villages. The "settlers" essentially moved into abandoned farmland.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary ruminates.

 

An all female group would be unnatural. Human beings evloved into two sexes that are interdependent. Men are not just walking bags of sperm. We are better at several things that are exactly what the colonists will need to be able to do on a more primative world.

[Seenar]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

They do it by over-populating the place where they live now. Look at the archeological record in many pacific islands and it's a record of population boom and bust. Land on a new island. Breed. Eat up everything. Fight, starve, throw in a little cannibalism, start again.

 

At some point people say "Well, we're all gonna die if we stay. Let's head east and hope we find something better." Some of them did. Many of them (perhaps most) probably died of thirst on the big blue section of the map.

 

cheers, Mark

 

Sure. My point is, going to another planet means an even longer more one way trip. They are going to have to be speical people.

[austenandrews]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

I think we are talking about the same thing here.

I think you're right.

[austenandrews]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

An all female group would be unnatural. Human beings evloved into two sexes that are interdependent. Men are not just walking bags of sperm. We are better at several things that are exactly what the colonists will need to be able to do on a more primative world.

Not to mention that transmission of culture is not an insignificant factor to plan for. An all-female culture would be entirely new in the history of mankind. The colony already has enough risk factors without adding one that big.

[BlackSword]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Unless the unfriiendly is amphibious and lives in the ocean, in which case you would have been better off choosing the local equlivent Death Valley.

 

I'm saying mine the local asteroid belt first, build a couple of O'Neil habatats, then pick out the highest point on the equator and build a beanstalk.

Thought about this a bit more after having made the post. At the very least, the generation ship would orbit the planet for several years to make climate studies to ensure they didn't land someplace in the path of frequent hurricanes or typhoons. That would be a bit of a pain. "Yay, we traveled several hundred light years to get here, now we get to wait another decade while we study the planet." But its better than being bug food.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: SciFi Colonists

 

Oh' date=' and to those discussing the analogy to the colonization of the New World; The environment they came to was not exactly "untamed wilderness." North America's Eastern Seaboard had already been farmed for a long time; it was relatively empty largely because, even before the colonists came in, explorers and adventurers had exposed the population to European diseases, which wiped out whole villages. The "settlers" essentially moved into abandoned farmland.[/quote']

Good point. I should have said "relatively untamed" Thanks.

 

Not to mention that transmission of culture is not an insignificant factor to plan for. An all-female culture would be entirely new in the history of mankind. The colony already has enough risk factors without adding one that big.

And of course it would only be all-female until the first male child was born. Then you've got yet another all-new cultural experiment. Best to limit oursleves to "just" the problems involved in colonizing an alien world without destabilizing our own society any more than we have to.

 

At the very least' date=' the generation ship would orbit the planet for several years to make climate studies to ensure they didn't land someplace in the path of frequent hurricanes or typhoons. That would be a bit of a pain. "Yay, we traveled several hundred light years to get here, now we get to wait another decade while we study the planet." But its better than being bug food. [/quote']

Good point, but I had assumed that would already have been done by survey ships before anyone invested the time & resources into sending a colony ship? I have a hard time seeing a group of people boarding a ship for a years-long voyage to a planet they don't know anything about.

 

 

bigdamnhero

“I had a plan…A good plan. Smart. Carefully laid out. But I got bored. All that watching, waiting. My legs started to cramp.â€